## CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary........................................................................................................... i 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... .........i 1.2 Summary Results................................................................................................................i

2. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1 2.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................. .........1

3. METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................3 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... ........3 3.2 Sample ...............................................................................................................................3 3.3 Sample Design.............................................................................................................. .....3 3.4 Questionnaire Design ....................................................................................................... .4 3.5 Fieldwork.................................................................................................................. .........5 3.6 Weighting .................................................................................................................. ........5 3.7 Analysis ................................................................................................................... ..........6 3.8 Statistical Significance ................................................................................................... ...6

4. COMPANY PROFILE......................................................................................................7 4.1 Age of Business.................................................................................................................7 4.2 Number of Employees.......................................................................................................8 4.3 Company Turnover..........................................................................................................10 4.4 Industry Sector............................................................................................................ .....12 4.5 Company Ownership.......................................................................................................15 4.6 Benefits of Selling into Overseas Markets ......................................................................17 4.7 Experience of Doing Business Overseas: Self-assessment .............................................19 4.8 Overseas Experience: Number of Years Doing Business Overseas................................21 4.9 Experience: Born Globals..............................................................................................23 4.10 Experience: Proportion of Turnover Accounted for by Overseas Sales.........................24 4.11 Experience: Number of Markets .....................................................................................26 4.12 Number of Regions ......................................................................................................... 29 4.13 Benefits of Expanding the Number of Overseas Markets in which a firm operates .......33 4.14 Innovative Companies.....................................................................................................36 4.15 IP Active Companies....................................................................................................... 39 4.16 Young Technology Intensive Firms ................................................................................40 4.17 Past Growth (Turnover)...................................................................................................41 4.18 Past Growth (Number of Markets)..................................................................................42 4.19 Past Growth: Employment ..............................................................................................44 4.20 Future Growth ............................................................................................................. ....48 4.21 Growth – ASBS Definition .............................................................................................51 4.22 Growth OECD Definition ...............................................................................................53 4.23 Business Planning......................................................................................................... ...55

5. MODES OF INTERNATIONALISATION ...................................................................60 5.1 Number of Modes............................................................................................................ 64

6. DRIVERS OF GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS.................................................................66 6.1 Market Perceptions......................................................................................................... 70 6.2 Market Perceptions: Summary .......................................................................................75

7. BARRIERS .................................................................................................................... .79

8. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Introduction

This research gathers evidence about trends in UK businesses’ international business strategies; barriers hindering such business, and associated needs for external help as well as awareness of, and propensity to use, UKTI; and related issues.

In terms of the specific research aims, the study was required to provide robust evidence to:

- identify UK business use of different modes of internationalisation and overseas market entry, including among young innovation and technology intensive firms
- identify drivers of geographical focus, including awareness of, and potential interest in, the emerging and high growth markets which were identified in UKTI’s five year strategy, published in 2006
- understand the barriers encountered by UK businesses in seeking to develop overseas business, both for new exporters and for companies seeking to enter new markets
- identify business needs for external help to overcome barriers and to address knowledge and skill needs associated with developing overseas business
- identify awareness and use of UKTI support
- understand the role of international market diversification in business development strategies, including its effects on: revenue growth and resilience, profitability, and return on investment in new product development
- identify and assess the extent to which credit conditions may be impacting on firms’ international business development, including related issues such as access to trade credit insurance and letters of credit.

This report outlines the key findings from this study.

1.2 Summary Results

Industry Sector

All companies were asked to identify the main activity of their business. The main activity for just over six in ten of the surveyed companies was manufacturing.

These self-reported main activities were simplified into four sectors namely services, construction, production and primary. In the 2008 survey, roughly similar proportions of the companies were either classified as production or services. In the 2009 survey, these proportions had changed considerably with approximately two thirds of the sample in the production, and a third in the services sector. This should be taken into consideration when interpreting the data. In this 2009 survey whilst the primary and construction industry sectors are still a minority there were more of these companies than in the 2008 survey.

Table 1: Simplified company sector

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Services | 32% | 36% | 41% | 22% | 22% | | | | | 27% | 12% | 24% | | Construction | 3% | 3% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 2% | 0% | 0% | | Production | 62% | 56% | 54% | 78% | 76% | | | | | 67% | 84% | 66% | | Primary | 4% | 5% | 3% | 0% | 3% | | | | | 4% | 3% | 5% |

Modes of Internationalisation

All respondents were asked to indicate which overseas business activities their firm had been involved in over the last 5 years. These modes included selling directly to businesses or individuals abroad, selling to businesses or individuals abroad through agents or distributors, licensing or franchising overseas, or other contractual arrangements (including joint ventures) and operating their own overseas site or office. Those companies not currently involved in any of these listed overseas activities were asked to indicate whether or not they were seriously considering starting to conduct overseas business via any of these routes in the next year. In order to be included in this survey, respondents had to respond positively to this question. This group (the ‘considerers’) were then also asked to indicate which types of overseas business activities they were planning to become involved in.

The majority of companies were selling directly abroad or via agents and distributors. The level of selling directly abroad was identical to the 2008 survey, whilst the level of selling through agents and distributors (67%) was much higher than in the 2008 survey (29%). Furthermore, the level of importing was much higher in the 2009 survey (76%) than identified in the 2008 survey (48%). Selling direct was more typically utilised by older companies.

Table 2: Simplified mode of internationalisation

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Direct sales | 90% | 87% | 88% | 93% | 89% | | | | | 92% | 91% | 94% | | Via agents/distributors | 67% | 58% | 57% | 78% | 81% | | | | | 74% | 74% | 81% | | Contractual arrangements (licensing, franchising and joint ventures) | 15% | 11% | 13% | 7% | 32% | | | | | 12% | 22% | 30% | | Overseas sites | 27% | 23% | 17% | 30% | 46% | | | | | 20% | 43% | 57% | | Importing | 76% | 69% | 76% | 81% | 78% | | | | | 77% | 90% | 81% | Drivers of Geographical Focus The table below shows the proportions of companies scoring against each of eight summary categories of drivers of geographical focus. Nearly three quarters of companies indicated that the measure of ‘network and serendipity’ played a vital role when companies conduct business overseas which strongly indicates the prominent role played by existing contacts and the element of chance. Furthermore, ‘language and culture’, ‘practicalities’, ‘contacts’ and ‘independent analysis’ are clearly important factors when considering a new market. Overall, these results are consistent with the 2008 survey. Table 3: Summary drivers of geographical focus Total Total

Base

Networks and serendipity Independent analysis

Up to 5 years

6-10 years 0 - 49

50 - 99

10+ years 100 +

0 - 49

50 – 99

100 +

911

236

249

27

37

196

58

108

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

74%

77%

77%

81%

76%

74%

66%

65%

55%

51%

55%

67%

59%

50%

60%

62%

Solely reactive Not significantly driven by any of these factors

13%

14%

13%

15%

5%

18%

10%

5%

13%

14%

11%

4%

8%

14%

14%

16%

Contacts

13%

12%

14%

11%

11%

15%

7%

18%

Practicalities

14%

13%

17%

7%

14%

13%

14%

14%

Language and culture

71%

75%

75%

85%

73%

66%

71%

63%

Risk and IP

36%

40%

39%

44%

38%

30%

36%

29%

Resources Not significantly driven by any of these factors

66%

91%

67%

0%

33%

75%

40%

56%

16%

14%

14%

7%

11%

19%

16%

25%

Barriers Following difficulties encountered in previous studies in measuring barriers through direct questioning techniques, a projective questioning technique was employed for both this and the 2008 survey. This technique attempted to circumvent issues relating to the reluctance of firms to acknowledge barriers by asking them to talk about issues that similar firms would face rather than necessarily their own company. The table below shows the proportions of firms scoring against each of six summary categories of barriers as well as the proportion scoring against at least one of these categories. Here the proportion indicating at least one barrier (91%) is much higher than in the 2008 survey where nearly eight in ten companies (79%) specified at least one barrier. As has been the case in previous studies, fixed cost barriers, contacts barriers and legal and regulatory barriers were highlighted as being amongst the most important barriers to conducting international business.

Accent

UKTI Evaluation Final Report November 2010.doc•TM•30.04.10

Page iii of vi

Table 4: Barriers to conducting overseas business

| % scoring 4 or 5 on a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 is ‘very easy’ and 5 is ‘very difficult’ | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---|---|---|---|---| | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Total | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Legal and regulatory | 58% | 55% | 48% | 59% | 73% | 63% | 62% | 70% | | Contacts | 61% | 56% | 60% | 67% | 62% | 64% | 66% | 66% | | Information | 21% | 18% | 22% | 22% | 22% | 27% | 9% | 21% | | Fixed costs | 78% | 72% | 76% | 89% | 86% | 79% | 86% | 83% | | Language and cultural | 37% | 35% | 34% | 30% | 43% | 38% | 36% | 44% | | Bias | 28% | 25% | 29% | 41% | 22% | 23% | 40% | 32% | | At least one barrier | 91% | 86% | 90% | 96% | 95% | 94% | 97% | 94% | | No significant barriers | 8% | 13% | 11% | 4% | 3% | 5% | 3% | 6% |

Number of Markets

Six in ten (60%) of the surveyed companies were in 11 or more markets. This is twice the proportion in the 2008 survey for which the equivalent figure was 30%. This indicates that the 2009 sample contains firms with more export experience than that of 2008. The number of markets in which a firm operates tends to increase with age.

Table 5: Number of Markets

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---|---|---|---|---| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Considerers | 1% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | | None | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | One country | 3% | 6% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 2-5 countries | 15% | 24% | 21% | 11% | 11% | 10% | 5% | 1% | | 6-10 countries | 21% | 25% | 27% | 19% | 22% | 19% | 16% | 8% | | 11-20 countries | 22% | 17% | 25% | 30% | 11% | 28% | 28% | 14% | | 21-50 countries | 26% | 17% | 19% | 19% | 43% | 34% | 31% | 42% | | More than 50 countries | 12% | 8% | 4% | 22% | 14% | 9% | 21% | 34% | | Don’t know | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

Number of regions

The following table summarises the number of regions of the world that these businesses were operating in. This table illustrates that nearly three quarters of companies (73%) were conducting business in four or more regions. This is indicative of the sample firms being experienced exporters and having geographically diversified export markets.

______________________________________________________________________

1 Two respondents stated they had not done business in any market over the last five years despite previously stating that they had sold directly to businesses or individuals abroad and had imported goods or services over the last five years. Table 6: Number of regions

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | | | | | | | | | | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | None | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 1% | | 1 | | 8% | 14% | 14% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 1% | | 2 | | 7% | 11% | 8% | 7% | 3% | 6% | 5% | 0% | | 3 | | 11% | 12% | 18% | 0% | 8% | 10% | 5% | 3% | | 4 or more | 73% | 62% | 60% | 93% | 86% | 81% | 90% | 95% |

Opportunities in Emerging and Fast Growing Markets

All companies were asked to indicate the regions of the world in which their business was active. They were then given a list of emerging markets and for each market in turn they were asked whether they saw it as being a ‘good opportunity’ for their company over the next 2 years, a ‘possible opportunity’, ‘unlikely to be an opportunity’ or ‘already doing business there’.

A comparison of the 2008 and 2009 survey reveals that seven in ten companies (70%) in the 2009 survey are ‘already in’ these emerging markets, compared to almost half (45%) in 2008. The level of ‘unlikely’ market opportunities in the 2009 survey (6%) was also half the level that it was in the 2008 survey (12%).

These results are unlikely to represent such a large increase in the number of firms entering emerging markets. The apparent increase is likely to be driven by the higher proportion of UKTI users in the 2009 sample (65% vs 35% in the 2008 sample) and a much higher proportion of firms in the 2009 sample which are already in over 25 markets, as well as a higher proportion in the manufacturing sector. Analysis of the 2008 survey indicated that a higher proportion of firms were already in emerging markets if they were users of UKTI, or if they were in the manufacturing sector.

Table 7: Summary of the opportunities in the emerging and fast growing markets

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | | | | | | | | | | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Already in | 70% | 65% | 59% | 74% | 73% | 79% | 76% | 82% | | Good opportunity | 12% | 10% | 14% | 15% | 14% | 10% | 17% | 11% | | Possible opportunity | 12% | 15% | 16% | 0% | 14% | 8% | 7% | 5% | | Unlikely | 6% | 9% | 11% | 7% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 2% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

The following table summarises for each country the perceived strength of opportunity available, with Saudi Arabia/UAE considered the best opportunity.

______________________________________________________________________

2 Four respondents stated they had not done business in any regions despite previously stating that they had sold directly to businesses or individuals abroad and had imported goods or services over the last five years. They were not classified as ‘considerers’. Table 8: Summary of the opportunities in the emerging and fast growing markets by country

| Country | Total | Russia | Turkey | South Africa | Saudi Arabia/United Arab Emirates | Brazil | Mexico | China | India | |--------------------------------|-------|--------|--------|--------------|-----------------------------------|--------|--------|-------|-------| | **Base** | 911 | 911 | 911 | 911 | 911 | 911 | 911 | 911 | 911 | | **Already in** | | | | | | | | | | | Russia | 70% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Turkey | 26% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | South Africa | 28% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Saudi Arabia/United Arab Emirates | 32% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Brazil | 42% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Mexico | 18% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | China | 15% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | India | 33% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

Economic Situation

All companies who were currently trading were asked to indicate whether their business had been negatively affected by the downturn in the USA, UK and European markets over the last year.

Overall companies were more likely to feel negatively affected by the economic downturn in the UK and USA markets than in the European markets, with companies over ten years of age most likely to feel the effects of the economic downturn in these markets.

The proportion of firms reporting being negatively impacted by the economic downturn in the UK and USA is somewhat higher (69%) than that reported in the 2008 survey (42%). While this suggests that more firms have been affected by the downturn in the intervening period between surveys (July-August 2008 to January-March 2009), this difference may partly be driven by the higher proportion of manufacturing firms in the 2009 sample.

Table 9: Impact of economic downturn in the UK, USA and Europe

| Country | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |--------------------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 – 49 | 50 – 99 | 100 + | 0 – 49 | 50 – 99 | 100 + | 0 – 49 | 50 – 99 | 100 + | | **Base** | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | | **UK and USA** | | | | | | | | | | | | | Yes | 69% | 67% | 67% | 74% | 73% | 68% | 74% | 76% | | | | | No | 29% | 30% | 32% | 26% | 24% | 30% | 26% | 22% | | | | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 3% | 0% | 2% | | | | | **Europe** | | | | | | | | | | | | | Yes | 60% | 57% | 55% | 70% | 70% | 60% | 66% | 69% | | | | | No | 38% | 41% | 43% | 30% | 27% | 39% | 33% | 30% | | | | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 2% | 2% | | | | UKTI Awareness and Usage

All companies were asked a series of questions to ascertain their level of awareness of UKTI and a selection of UKTI services. Those aware of UKTI or of any of its services were then asked to indicate whether they had actually used any of these services. Both awareness and usage of UKTI services are based on a positive response to any of the UKTI services and not necessarily solely UKTI.

Awareness of UKTI services does appear to vary with both company age and size with older and larger companies more likely to be aware of UKTI services. Most respondents were aware of UKTI itself (79%) with the commercial services provided by embassies overseas known by nearly three quarters (71%) of companies. This level of awareness is much higher than in the previous survey when the comparable figures for awareness of UKTI and the commercial services provided by embassies overseas were known by 51% and 55% respectively. Rather than indicating a significant increase in awareness, this result is likely to be driven by the much higher proportion of users of UKTI services in the 2009 sample (68%) compared to that of 2008 (35%).

Table 10: Awareness of UKTI services

| Service | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------------------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | | | | | | | UKTI | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Commercial services provided by embassies overseas | 79% | 73% | 75% | 74% | 81% | 86% | 86% | 90% | | The international Trade Advisors based in Business Links | 71% | 61% | 63% | 81% | 65% | 85% | 76% | 88% | | Passport to Export | 60% | 53% | 56% | 67% | 59% | 66% | 66% | 72% | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | 41% | 34% | 39% | 48% | 35% | 49% | 38% | 45% | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | 31% | 25% | 26% | 44% | 38% | 33% | 31% | 44% | | The Tradeshows Access Programme (TAP) | 14% | 12% | 16% | 11% | 8% | 18% | 4% | 14% | | The Overseas marketing Information Service (OMIS) | 37% | 31% | 35% | 56% | 35% | 39% | 38% | 46% | | Awareness of UKTI or at least one UKTI service | 41% | 37% | 34% | 48% | 30% | 45% | 47% | 56% |

UKTI services had been used by the majority of the survey respondents (68%) with about 70% of these recognising that UKTI provided the service. Of the individual services used, the commercial services provided by embassies overseas (45%) were the most commonly used among the sample firms. Table 11: Usage of UKTI services

| Service | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UKTI | 48% | 39% | 41% | 44% | 46% | 56% | 60% | 67% | | Commercial services provided by embassies overseas | 45% | 34% | 36% | 41% | 41% | 54% | 59% | 67% | | The international Trade Advisors based in Business Links | 36% | 28% | 31% | 41% | 32% | 42% | 38% | 48% | | Passport to Export | 15% | 13% | 19% | 11% | 5% | 20% | 3% | 14% | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | 12% | 9% | 7% | 19% | 19% | 14% | 16% | 17% | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | 5% | 2% | 4% | 7% | 3% | 7% | 2% | 9% | | The Tradeshow Access Programme (TAP) | 16% | 11% | 12% | 22% | 14% | 19% | 22% | 23% | | The Overseas Marketing Information Service (OMIS) | 19% | 14% | 13% | 19% | 16% | 22% | 29% | 33% | | Usage of UKTI or at least one UKTI service | 68% | 57% | 59% | 67% | 65% | 79% | 79% | 89% | 2. INTRODUCTION

UK Trade & Investment (UKTI) commissioned this research as the second wave of an annual survey to gather evidence about trends in UK businesses’ international business strategies; barriers hindering such businesses to internationalise, and associated needs for external help; awareness of, and propensity to use UKTI; and related issues. The first wave of the survey was carried out during late 2008, replacing a former annual UKTI awareness survey.

Evidence from the current 2009 survey will be used to help inform UKTI policy development and other aspects of UK Government policy relating to international trade and investment and the ability of British business to fully optimise UK opportunities in global markets.

The 2009 survey has replicated the majority of the 2008 survey material, in order to provide consistent data on topics which require annual monitoring; however, some changes were also made in order to include more comprehensive questioning on the impact of the current economic downturn in the UK, USA and Europe.

Future waves of the survey are expected to follow a similar pattern, combining continuity with some variation, in order to capture data on a wider range of issues at less frequent intervals.

This survey is intended to complement evidence already available from other surveys of UK business most notably:

- UKTI’s Performance and Impact Monitoring Survey (PIMS) of businesses which have used UKTI trade services. This captures some evidence about overseas business experience and export strategy;
- UKTI’s annual survey of exporters who have not used UKTI trade services, in addition to gathering information about overseas business experience and strategy, it captures evidence about barriers to overseas business activity and associated needs for external assistance;
- The Community Innovation Survey (CIS) which is representative at national level of firms with at least 10 employees. It captures some evidence about international aspects of innovation activity including international partnerships, as well as export activity.

2.1 Objectives

The research aims of the 2009 wave of this survey, as stated in the brief, were to:

- identify UK business use of different modes of internationalisation and overseas market entry, including among young innovation and technology intensive firms • identify drivers of geographical focus, including awareness of, and potential interest in, the emerging and high growth markets which were identified in UKTI’s five year strategy, published in 2006

• understand the barriers encountered by UK businesses in seeking to develop overseas business, both for new exporters and for firms seeking to enter new markets

• identify business needs for external help to overcome barriers and to address knowledge and skill needs associated with developing overseas business

• identify awareness and use of UKTI support

• to understand the role of international market diversification in business development strategies, including its effects on: revenue growth and resilience, profitability, and return on investment in new product development

• to identify and assess the extent to which credit conditions may be impacting on firms’ international business development, including related issues such as access to trade credit insurance and letters of credit.

The initial five aims were replicated from the previous 2008 survey whilst the latter two, namely market diversification and access to credit, relate to issues which have arisen from the context of the present difficult economic conditions. These latter two areas used some questions from PIMS in addition to new questions which were developed for the survey. 3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

The research was conducted via quantitative research namely CATI(^3) interviews, administered by Accent’s specialist interviewers with extensive experience of conducting interviews with senior level respondents.

3.2 Sample

A base of 911 interviews was conducted with companies either currently engaged in, or over the next 12 months seriously considering conducting, some form of overseas business activity. This included the full range of internationalisation modes, including selling to overseas customers both directly and via agents or distributors, operating via contractual agreements and firms operating their own overseas sites.

Whilst the majority of the companies interviewed in this survey (ie 903 of the 911) were involved in at least one of these forms of internationalisation at the time of the interview, a small number (ie 8 companies) were only planning to become involved in this type of activity over the next 12 months. As previously, this latter group have been labelled ‘considerers’ in the analysis. This sample group was somewhat smaller than the 55 considerers identified in the 2008 survey.

3.3 Sample Design

The sample frame was built from a random sample of all businesses which was purchased from a reputable sample provider namely Sample Answers. Sample Answers sourced the data from Corpdata who have a comprehensive business database comprising over 1.3 million UK business contacts covering every major industry in the UK. It is based upon a combination of the Experian National Business Database and the LBM Business File, supplemented by Kompass and other sources - these are, in turn, based upon information from Companies House, Thomson Directories and the Credit Risk File.

Whilst it may take time for younger businesses to be present on any business database Sample Answers quota strategy ensures that both younger and older businesses are represented. The sample was screened to ascertain involvement in overseas business activity either currently or over the next 12 months. This methodology permitted the inclusion of ‘considerers’ in the research.

The sample was stratified by both age of company and number of employees. It was decided that a disproportionate sample design would be used, so that a roughly equal number of firms were interviewed that were aged up to 5 years, aged 6-10 years and aged more than 10 years (to allow for robust analysis by age group). The final breakdown of companies included in this research is summarised in the table below.

(^3) Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing. Table 12: Sample breakdown

| | Actual number of employees | Target number of employees | |------------------|-----------------------------|----------------------------| | | 1-49 employees | 50-99 | 100 plus employees | Total | 1-49 employees | 50-99 | 100 plus employees | Total | | Up to 5 years | 166 | 20 | 50 | 236 | As it falls out | As it falls out | As it falls out | 300 | | 6-10 years | 249 | 27 | 37 | 313 | 240 | 30 | 30 | 300 | | 10 plus years | 196 | 58 | 108 | 362 | 180 | 60 | 60 | 300 | | Base | 611 | 105 | 195 | 911 | 520 | 190 | 190 | 900 |

In order to maximise the incidence of firms eligible for interview (ie those who were engaging in international business activity) it was decided to exclude from the outset a number of industry sectors which one might expect would have a very low proportion of companies involved in overseas business activity. These exclusions were based on the exclusions reported from the previous survey in 2008 and also from additional common-sense exclusions based on interviewer feedback from the initial pilot interviews. The analysis only permitted exclusions at the level of 2-digit SIC codes. These initial exclusions are summarised in Appendix A.

3.4 Questionnaire Design

The majority of the questionnaire was a replica of the questionnaire used in the 2008 survey with the further inclusion of questions relating to the two new objectives namely:

- to understand the role of international market diversification in business development strategies, including its effects on: revenue growth and resilience, profitability, and return on investment in new product development

- to identify and assess the extent to which credit conditions may be impacting on firms’ international business development, including related issues such as access to trade credit insurance and letters of credit.

Thus given that this research covered areas that have not been covered in previous studies, an initial qualitative phase comprising ten cognitive interviews was conducted to help inform the quantitative questionnaire design. These face-to-face interviews conducted by the Accent project executives, were conducted using a Topic Guide agreed following meetings with both the Accent and the UKTI project manager. From these cognitive interviews further questions were drafted primarily on the topic of the impact on business of the economic downturn in the UK, US and European markets.

Following this initial qualitative phase the quantitative questionnaire was drafted, with a pilot of 20 CATI interviews conducted prior to the main fieldwork to test the questionnaire design, including the new questions, and to ensure that the questionnaire flowed smoothly.

At the start of this questionnaire to ensure that we were speaking to the individual who was most qualified to talk about their firm’s international business activities, Accent interviewers carefully probed with initial screening questions and also asked for the respondent’s job title to ensure that the right calibre of respondent was answering the questionnaire. Typically the respondent was a Director of the company with roles including Business Development Director, Sales Director and Marketing Director. A copy of the final questionnaire is appended to this report as Appendix B.

### 3.5 Fieldwork

The main fieldwork was conducted between 3 March and 24 April 2009 at Accent’s two Telephone Units based in Bristol and Edinburgh. The interview duration was an average of 25 minutes, which was longer than the duration of the 2008 interview which was reported to be an average of 19 minutes.

The following table summarises the number of sample records selected for CATI, the approximate number of records lost due to screening-out or incorrect contact details, and the number of interviews completed along with the associated response and refusal rates.

**Table 13: Accent sample breakdown**

| CATI SCREENING | | |-----------------------------------------------------|----------| | Selection for CATI | 23,363 | | Unusable – no overseas business activity | 12,286 | | Unusable – contact details incorrect | 1,575 |

| ACHIEVED INTERVIEWS / RESPONSE RATES | | |-----------------------------------------------------|----------| | Total usable sample | 9,502 | | Interviews achieved | 911 | | Response rate (%) | 10% | | Refusal rate (%) | 24% |

### 3.6 Weighting

The data presented in this report has not been weighted due to the disproportionate nature of the sample design (ie the disproportionate sampling by age of firm and the number of employees). Hence all of the data tables reported in the subsequent chapters are of the unweighted data. The research team did consider weighting the data in line with the weighting undertaken for the 2008 survey but this would have given low weights to the larger firms. In order for the analysis to reflect the responses from these larger firms, the data were left unweighted but presented in a format which reflects the sample design.

The report provides some comparisons with the results of the 2008 survey. The table below provides a comparison of the data by age group.

**Table 14: Comparison of data by age group**

| | 2008 weighted survey data | 2009 unweighted survey data | |----------------------|---------------------------|-----------------------------| | Up to 5 years | 19% | 26% | | 6-10 years | 19% | 34% | | More than 10 years | 62% | 40% | 3.7 Analysis

Throughout the report, each variable is analysed first for the whole sample and then by two sets of sub-groups which reflect Intellectual Property (IP) activity and usage of UKTI services.

Respondent firms were classified as IP active if they reported that they held patents or trademarks either in the UK or overseas. All other respondents were classified as non-IP active.

Users of UKTI services were identified as firms which reported having used a UKTI service at some point in the past ie usage was not restricted to a determined period. The profile of UKTI users in this survey differs from that of the profile of UKTI clients identified through the UKTI Performance and Impact Monitoring Survey (PIMS). PIMS is a quarterly survey of UKTI clients which have used its trade services 6 months prior to taking part in the survey (with the exception of clients of the Passport service, for which the service was received 1 year prior to the interview). Clients are randomly sampled to take part in the survey and PIMS results show a consistent profile of UKTI clients.

When interpreting the results of this survey, the differences between UKTI users as identified in this survey and the PIMS survey should be borne in mind. Where relevant, differences between the profiles of UKTI clients identified in this survey, compared to PIMS are highlighted in the text. For the purposes of comparison, tables are provided which show analysis by the sub-groups of users and non-users from this survey with data from 2008 and 2009 PIMS surveys of non-users of UKTI services (PIMS Non-users) and the results of two sets of pooled PIMS results for four quarters (PIMS 12-15 and PIMS 7-10).

3.8 Statistical Significance

Throughout the report, where a difference between two groups (eg UKTI users and non-users) has been found to be statistically significant at the 5% level (using a Mann Whitney test), for individual questions this is indicated in the text as being statistically significant. This level of significance indicates that one can be 95% certain that the differences between the two sample groups with the specific characteristic being tested are not the same. The Mann Whitney test was used because the sample was not ‘normally’ distributed. 4. COMPANY PROFILE

This chapter provides descriptive analysis of the characteristics of the survey respondents. The survey results are presented in such a way as to reflect the sampling strategy used in the survey. Each variable is analysed first for the whole sample and then by two sets of sub-groups which reflect Intellectual Property (IP) activity and usage of UKTI services.

4.1 Age of Business

All companies were asked to state how long ago their business was established. For further clarification, interviewers were also asked to read out that this meant when the business in ‘its current form’ started trading. Furthermore, if the business were a subsidiary then the respondent was asked to respond to this question in terms of the subsidiary in which they worked.

The following table depicts the unweighted figures for when the business was established by the size of the company as defined by the number of employees. There is a good representation of companies within each of the size classifications.

| Table 15: Company age by size of company | |-----------------------------------------| | Total | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | Up to 5 years | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | 6-10 years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | 0-9 employees | 33% | 42% | 49% | 0% | 0% | 38% | 0% | 0% | | 10-49 employees | 34% | 28% | 51% | 0% | 0% | 62% | 0% | 0% | | 50-99 employees | 12% | 8% | 0% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 0% | | 100+ employees | 21% | 21% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 100% |

Typically, the IP active companies are older than their non-IP active counterparts. When IP active companies are broken down by age, there appears to be a trend towards the proportion of IP active firms increasing with age. However, the same trend is not apparent among non-IP active firms, with a peak in the 6 to 10 age group and fewer companies aged more than 10 years, which suggest the relationship here may be more complex.

| Table 16: Company age by IP activity | |-------------------------------------| | Total | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | Up to 5 years | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | 6-10 years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | Up to 5 years | 23% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | 6-10 years | 29% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | 10+ years | 47% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Non-IP active | Up to 5 years | 28% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | 6-10 years | 40% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | 10+ years | 32% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | According to the current survey data, UKTI usage appears to increase with the age of the company, with the longer established companies more likely to have been a user of UKTI services. As with IP activity however, the relationship is non-linear for the non-UKTI users with the proportions increasing for companies aged up to ten years and then decreasing for the older companies.

Table 17: Company age by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Up to 5 years | | 22% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 6-10 years | | 31% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 10+ years | | 48% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Up to 5 years | | 35% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 6-10 years | | 42% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 10+ years | | 23% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

The following table summarises the current survey results with results from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009. Whilst the current survey data shows UKTI usage increasing with the age of the company; this is in contrast to PIMS data for over 7,000 firms. The PIMS data indicate that although over half of users are firms which are at least 10 years old, one quarter are up to 5 years old. The proportion dips for firms that are 6-10 years old. Data from PIMS non-user surveys for 2008 and 2009 show no consistent pattern as regards the age profile of non-users.

Table 18: Comparison of survey results for company age by UKTI usage with results from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| | Total | This survey UKTI Non-users | This survey UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS Non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |------------------|-------|---------------------------|-----------------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|------------------| | UKTI users | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Up to 5 years | | 35% | 22% | 17% | 26% | 32% | 26% | | 6-10 years | | 42% | 31% | 23% | 17% | 31% | 17% | | 10+ years | | 23% | 48% | 60% | 55% | 36% | 56% |

4.2 Number of Employees

All companies were asked to indicate the number of people currently employed by their business in the UK. Respondents unable to offer a precise number here were presented with banded numbers and were asked to state which of these bands was most appropriate for their company.

Younger and older companies were more likely to have more than 100 employees. However, this result should be interpreted with caution since it may be driven by anomalies in the survey sample: there were a considerably higher proportion of firms under 5 years old with at least 100 employees in this survey than was found in either the 2008 wave of this survey or found in the Annual Small Business Survey (ASBS) 2007.

Table 19: Company size by company age

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 196 | 58 | 108 | | 0-9 employees | 33% | 42% | 49% | 0% | 0% | | 10-49 employees| 34% | 28% | 51% | 0% | 0% | | 50-99 employees| 12% | 8% | 0% | 100% | 0% | | 100+ employees | 21% | 21% | 0% | 0% | 100% |

IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to have both fewer than nine employees and also more than one hundred employees. Again this may be driven by anomalies in the survey sample. There were statistically significant differences in the number of employees between IP active and non-IP active companies.

Table 20: Company size by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 0-9 employees | 20% | 29% | 38% | 0% | 0% | | 10-49 employees| 33% | 25% | 62% | 0% | 0% | | 50-99 employees| 14% | 10% | 0% | 100% | 0% | | 100+ employees | 32% | 36% | 0% | 0% | 100% |

In this survey, UKTI users had a higher proportion of companies with more than one hundred employees than equivalent sized firms which were non-UKTI users. There were statistically significant differences in the number of employees by UKTI usage. Table 21: Company size by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 0-9 employees | | 30% | 40% | 51% | 0% | 0% | 38% | 0% | 0% | | 10-49 employees | | 32% | 24% | 49% | 0% | 0% | 62% | 0% | 0% | | 50-99 employees | | 12% | 8% | 0% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 0% | | 100+ employees | | 25% | 27% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 100% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 0-9 employees | | 38% | 45% | 48% | 0% | 0% | 38% | 0% | 0% | | 10-49 employees | | 39% | 34% | 52% | 0% | 0% | 62% | 0% | 0% | | 50-99 employees | | 10% | 9% | 0% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 0% | | 100+ employees | | 13% | 13% | 0% | 0% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 100% |

However, a higher proportion of firms with over 100 employees were observed in the survey sample than in either the PIMS user or non-user surveys. For example, this current survey found that 1 in 4 UKTI users have over 100 employees, while evidence from over 7,000 users participating in PIMS surveys suggests that the proportion is closer to 1 in 5 as shown in the table below.

Table 22: Comparison of company size by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| | Total | UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS Non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |------------------|-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|------------------| | | | | | | | | | | UKTI users | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 0-9 employees | | 38% | 30% | 59% | 41% | 56% | 42% | | 10-49 employees | | 39% | 32% | 33% | 28% | 37% | 29% | | 50-99 employees | | 10% | 12% | 4% | 8% | 4% | 10% | | 100+ employees | | 13% | 25% | 4% | 20% | 1% | 18% |

4.3 Company Turnover

All companies were asked to indicate what the annual turnover of their business was. Companies established in the last year were asked to predict the turnover of their business in the first year of trading. Respondents unable to offer a precise figure here were presented with banded amounts and were asked to state which of these bands they felt was most appropriate for their company.

Firms in the 2009 survey sample, compared to the 2008 survey sample, tended to have higher turnover. In the 2008 survey, half (53%) of the internationalising companies had fairly modest turnovers of up to £2 million while only one third (32%) of the sample firms in the 2009 survey had this level of turnover. In contrast, 27% of the 2009 sample had turnover exceeding £10 million, compared to 6% of firms in the 2008 survey sample. Table 23: Annual company turnover

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Up to £500,000 | 11% | 17% | 16% | 0% | 0% | | £500,000 - £2M | 21% | 25% | 29% | 4% | 0% | | £2M-£10M | 27% | 23% | 32% | 44% | 5% | | £10M-£50M | 16% | 14% | 6% | 41% | 30% | | More than £50M | 11% | 11% | 4% | 7% | 43% | | Don’t know/refused | 14% | 11% | 13% | 4% | 22% |

There were statistically significant differences in the annual turnover between IP active and non-IP active companies. IP active companies were more than twice as likely as non-IP active companies (39% vs 16%) to have annual turnovers of more than £10 million.

Table 24: Annual company turnover by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Up to £500,000 | 6% | 9% | 11% | 0% | 0% | | £500,000 - £2M | 16% | 22% | 28% | 0% | 0% | | £2M-£10M | 25% | 21% | 38% | 29% | 0% | | £10M-£50M | 23% | 19% | 6% | 59% | 35% | | More than £50M | 16% | 14% | 4% | 6% | 50% | | Don’t know/refused | 14% | 15% | 13% | 6% | 15% |

There were statistically significant differences in the annual turnover between UKTI users and non-UKTI users. Fewer than six in ten (57%) UKTI users had annual turnovers of up to £10 million, compared to two thirds (65%) of non-UKTI users. Hence, UKTI users were slightly more likely than non-UKTI users to have annual turnovers in excess of £10 million. Table 25: Annual company turnover by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Up to £500,000 | 10% | 13% | 16% | 0% | 0% | 12% | 0% | 2% | | £500,000 - £2M | 19% | 22% | 31% | 0% | 0% | 28% | 2% | 0% | | £2M-£10M | 28% | 24% | 31% | 50% | 4% | 35% | 43% | 8% | | £10M-£50M | 18% | 15% | 5% | 44% | 29% | 7% | 30% | 44% | | More than £50M | 12% | 12% | 2% | 0% | 42% | 3% | 9% | 35% | | Don’t know/refused | 14% | 13% | 15% | 6% | 25% | 15% | 15% | 10% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Up to £500,000 | 14% | 21% | 17% | 0% | 0% | 7% | 0% | 0% | | £500,000 - £2M | 24% | 29% | 27% | 11% | 0% | 29% | 0% | 0% | | £2M-£10M | 27% | 21% | 34% | 33% | 8% | 33% | 25% | 8% | | £10M-£50M | 13% | 12% | 6% | 33% | 31% | 7% | 50% | 42% | | More than £50M | 9% | 9% | 6% | 22% | 46% | 0% | 8% | 17% | | Don’t know/refused | 13% | 9% | 11% | 0% | 15% | 24% | 17% | 33% |

The turnover of companies in the current 2009 survey was typically higher for both UKTI users and non-UKTI users than in the PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009 (Table 26).

Table 26: Comparison of annual company turnover by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| UKTI users | Base | UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS Non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |------------|------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|------------------| | | | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | Up to £500,000 | 14% | 10% | 35% | 28% | 29% | 29% | | £500,000-£2 million | 24% | 19% | 31% | 19% | 36% | 19% | | £2-£10 million | 27% | 28% | 17% | 18% | 17% | 17% | | £10-£50 million | 13% | 18% | 5% | 11% | 3% | 9% | | More than £50 million | 9% | 12% | 2% | 6% | 1% | 4% | | Don’t know/refused/not yet trading | 13% | 14% | 10% | 17% | 14% | 21% |

4.4 Industry Sector

All companies were asked to identify the main activity of their business.

The main activity for just over six in ten (62%) of the surveyed companies was manufacturing, followed by retail for just under one in seven companies (15%), as summarised in the table below. The following table shows the profile of firms in terms of their industry sector. The data on sector is collected at the level of 1-digit SIC code, but for the purpose of this analysis has been summarised into four main classifications which are:

- Primary industries
- Production
- Construction
- Services.

### Table 27: Industry sector

| Sector | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------------------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Agriculture, hunting & forestry | 1% | 2% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 2% | | Fishing | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Mining & quarrying | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 2% | 2% | | Manufacturing | 62% | 56% | 54% | 78% | 76% | 67% | 84% | 66% | | Electricity, gas and water supply | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 2% | 1% | | Construction | 3% | 3% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 6% | | Retail, wholesale & repair of motor vehicles | 15% | 16% | 19% | 7% | 3% | 18% | 9% | 10% | | Hotels and catering | 0% | 0% | 0% | 7% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Transport, storage and communication | 5% | 9% | 8% | 0% | 5% | 1% | 0% | 2% | | Financial intermediation (Finance) | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 1% | | Real estate, renting & business activities | 4% | 4% | 5% | 4% | 5% | 2% | 0% | 3% | | Public administration and defence | 1% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 4% | | Education | 1% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 2% | | Health and social work | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 2% | 0% | 1% | | Other community, social & personal service activities | 3% | 4% | 4% | 4% | 3% | 1% | 2% | 2% | | Other | 1% | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 0% |

In the 2008 survey, roughly similar proportions of the companies were either classified as being in the production (46%) or services (52%) sectors. In the 2009 survey, these proportions had changed considerably with approximately two thirds of the sample (62%) in the production, and a third (32%) in the services sector. This should be taken into consideration when interpreting the data. In this 2009 survey, whilst the primary and construction industry sectors are still a minority, more of these companies were surveyed than in the 2008 survey. Table 29: Simplified industry sector

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Services | 32% | 36% | 41% | 22% | 27% | | | | | 27% | 12% | 24% | | Construction | 3% | 3% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 2% | 0% | 6% | | Production | 62% | 56% | 54% | 78% | 76% | | | | | 67% | 84% | 66% | | Primary | 4% | 5% | 3% | 0% | 3% | | | | | 4% | 3% | 5% |

There were statistically significant differences in the industry sector by IP active and non-IP active companies. A higher proportion of non-IP active firms were in the services sector than was the case for IP active firms. This does not necessarily mean that service firms are less likely to be IP active than manufacturing but rather may be a reflection of the relatively low proportions of the sample coming from service sectors such as finance which have relatively high levels of IP activity (around 30% of firms in the finance sector held trademarks in 2000(^4)). Similarly, a higher proportion of IP active firms were in the production sector than was the case for non-IP active firms.

Table 30: Simplified industry sector by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active| 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Services | 23% | 30% | 32% | 24% | 27% | | | | | 14% | 11% | 19% | | Construction | 2% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 3% | 0% | 2% | | Production | 72% | 66% | 61% | 76% | 73% | | | | | 80% | 89% | 75% | | Primary | 3% | 2% | 6% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 2% | 0% | 4% |

| | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | |----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | | | | | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Services | 40% | 42% | 45% | 20% | 9% | | | | | 39% | 14% | 40% | | Construction | 3% | 4% | 3% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 1% | 0% | 16% | | Production | 52% | 47% | 50% | 80% | 82% | | | | | 55% | 76% | 36% | | Primary | 5% | 7% | 2% | 0% | 9% | | | | | 5% | 10% | 8% |

In this survey, UKTI users were more likely to be dominant in the production sector whilst non-UKTI users were more equally split between both the services and the production sectors (Table 31). Thus there were statistically significant differences in the industry sector between UKTI users and non-UKTI users.

However, this is very different to the client profile consistently achieved from PIMS which shows that 60% of UKTI clients are in the services sector, and 38% in production, as shown below (Table 32).

(^4) Greenhalgh and Rogers 2005 Table 31: Simplified industry sector by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | | | | | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Services | 26% | 24% | 39% | 6% | 29% | | | | | 25% | 11% | 21% | | Construction | 3% | 4% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 3% | 0% | 6% | | Production | 68% | 67% | 57% | 94% | 67% | | | | | 71% | 85% | 69% | | Primary | 3% | 6% | 3% | 0% | 4% | | | | | 1% | 4% | 4% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | | | | 13 | 13 | 42 | | | | 12 | 12 | 12 | | Services | 44% | 53% | 44% | 56% | | | | 8% | 8% | 36% | | | | 17% | 17% | 50% | | Construction | 2% | 2% | 3% | 0% | | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Production | 50% | 42% | 50% | 44% | | | | 92% | 92% | 52% | | | | 83% | 83% | 42% | | Primary | 4% | 3% | 4% | 0% | | | | 0% | 0% | 12% | | | | 0% | 0% | 12% | | | | 8% | 8% | 8% |

The following table comprises the comparable data from the PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009.

Table 32: Comparison of sectors by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| Total | UKTI non-users | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|-----------------| | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Services | 44% | 26% | 47% | 60% | 45% | 59% | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Construction | 2% | 3% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Production | 50% | 68% | 50% | 38% | 53% | 38% | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Primary | 4% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 2% | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

4.5 Company Ownership

All respondents were asked to indicate whether their business was UK owned, foreign-owned or jointly UK and foreign-owned.

As in the 2008 survey, the majority of companies were UK owned. However, the 2009 survey sample contained a higher proportion of foreign-owned companies, with one in seven foreign-owned (15%), compared to one in ten (9%) in the 2008 survey. This suggests that the 2009 sample has a bias towards foreign-owned firms. In both surveys, only a small minority of firms were jointly UK and foreign-owned.

Table 33: Company ownership by company age

| Total | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | | | | 37 | 196 | 58 | | | | 108 | 100% | 100% | | UK-owned | 81% | 81% | 89% | 74% | | | | 51% | 85% | 74% | | | | 69% | 69% | 69% | | Foreign-owned | 15% | 14% | 9% | 26% | | | | 46% | 11% | 17% | | | | 28% | 28% | 28% | | Joint UK and foreign-owned | 3% | 4% | 2% | 0% | | | | 3% | 3% | 3% | | | | 3% | 3% | 3% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | | 2% | 0% | 1% | IP active companies were more likely to be foreign-owned than non-IP active companies.

Table 34: Company ownership by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UK-owned | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 73% | 72% | 82% | 65% | 46% | | Foreign-owned | | 23% | 21% | 16% | 35% | | Joint UK and foreign-owned | | 4% | 7% | 2% | 0% | | Don’t know | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UK-owned | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Foreign-owned | | 88% | 89% | 93% | 90% | | Joint UK and foreign-owned | | 3% | 2% | 2% | 0% | | Don’t know | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

Similar proportions of users and non-users of UKTI services were UK owned, foreign-owned and jointly UK and foreign-owned.

Table 35: Company ownership by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UK-owned | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Foreign-owned | | 81% | 79% | 93% | 72% | | Joint UK and foreign-owned | | 3% | 4% | 2% | 0% | | Don’t know | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UK-owned | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Foreign-owned | | 80% | 84% | 84% | 78% | | Joint UK and foreign-owned | | 3% | 4% | 2% | 0% | | Don’t know | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

Among users of UKTI services, 15% of firms from the current survey were foreign-owned compared to 10% and 7% in PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 respectively. This is indicative of the 2009 survey having a bias towards foreign-owned firms. Compared to the PIMS 7-10 sample of 3,143 firms, twice as many foreign-owned firms participated in this survey.

The difference was also large for non-users with 17% of the survey sample of non-users being foreign-owned (ie close to 1 in 6 firms) which was almost double the 9% and 8% found in the 2009 and 2008 PIMS non-user surveys. Table 36: Comparison of company ownership by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| | Total | UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS Non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |----------------------|-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|-----------------| | **UKTI users** | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | **UK-owned** | | 80% | 81% | 90% | 83% | 90% | 86% | | **Foreign-owned** | | 17% | 15% | 9% | 10% | 8% | 7% | | **Joint UK and foreign-owned** | | 3% | 3% | 0% | 2% | 2% | 2% | | **Don’t know/refused/not for profit/other business type** | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 5% | 0% | 5% |

4.6 Benefits of Selling into Overseas Markets

All respondents were asked to indicate whether for their own company the following were possible benefits of selling into overseas markets. Respondents were asked to rate a list of benefits on a 5 point scale, where 1 meant it was a benefit ‘to no extent’ and 5 meant it was a benefit ‘to a critical extent’.

The main benefits of selling into overseas markets were to achieve a level of growth otherwise not possible and to fully utilise exiting capacity. However, for firms over 5 years and with 50-99 employees, exposure to new ideas was more frequently cited than fully using existing capacity.

Table 37: Benefits of selling into overseas markets

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Achieve a level of growth otherwise not possible | 79% | 72% | 76% | 89% | 86% | 84% | 84% | 89% | | Fully utilise your existing capacity | 76% | 75% | 69% | 74% | 86% | 77% | 81% | 87% | | Reduce dependence on a single or small number of markets | 63% | 60% | 58% | 67% | 70% | 65% | 66% | 71% | | Exposure to new ideas | 72% | 71% | 67% | 85% | 68% | 67% | 84% | 84% | | Increase the commercial life span of products and services | 54% | 50% | 47% | 67% | 65% | 52% | 60% | 70% |

IP active companies were more likely to state that each of these statements were a benefit of international trading than non-IP active companies. Achieving a level of growth otherwise not possible remained the most frequently cited benefit for IP active and non-IP active firms. However, IP active firms were as likely to indicate that exposure to new ideas was a benefit as they were to indicate the benefit of fully utilising existing capacity. For non-IP active firms, exposure to new ideas was a less important benefit. Table 38: Benefits of selling into overseas markets by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Achieve a level of growth otherwise not possible | 88% | 81% | 88% | 88% | 85% | 90% | 92% | 94% | | | | Fully utilise your existing capacity | 81% | 81% | 74% | 76% | 88% | 80% | 81% | 86% | | | | Reduce dependence on a single or small number of markets | 70% | 68% | 63% | 76% | 73% | 73% | 73% | 71% | | | | Exposure to new ideas | 81% | 80% | 76% | 100% | 69% | 76% | 95% | 88% | | | | Increase the commercial life span of products and services | 63% | 64% | 57% | 76% | 58% | 61% | 62% | 73% | | | | Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Achieve a level of growth otherwise not possible | 71% | 64% | 69% | 90% | 91% | 79% | 71% | 72% | | | | Fully utilise your existing capacity | 71% | 70% | 67% | 70% | 82% | 73% | 81% | 92% | | | | Reduce dependence on a single or small number of markets | 56% | 53% | 55% | 50% | 64% | 57% | 52% | 72% | | | | Exposure to new ideas | 63% | 64% | 62% | 60% | 64% | 59% | 67% | 72% | | | | Increase the commercial life span of products and services | 44% | 38% | 42% | 50% | 82% | 42% | 57% | 60% | | |

UKTI users were more likely to state that each of these statements were a benefit of international trading than non-UKTI users. The most frequently cited benefit by firms that were over 5 years old and had 50-99 employees was exposure to new ideas.

Table 39: Benefits of selling into overseas markets by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Achieve a level of growth otherwise not possible | 85% | 81% | 82% | 89% | 88% | 88% | 85% | 90% | | | | Fully utilise your existing capacity | 78% | 81% | 70% | 72% | 88% | 77% | 80% | 85% | | | | Reduce dependence on a single or small number of markets | 68% | 70% | 62% | 72% | 63% | 70% | 67% | 72% | | | | Exposure to new ideas | 76% | 79% | 70% | 94% | 67% | 71% | 85% | 85% | | | | Increase the commercial life span of products and services | 57% | 58% | 49% | 72% | 67% | 51% | 65% | 69% | | | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Achieve a level of growth otherwise not possible | 68% | 59% | 66% | 89% | 85% | 71% | 83% | 83% | | | | Fully utilise your existing capacity | 72% | 66% | 68% | 78% | 85% | 76% | 83% | 100% | | | | Reduce dependence on a single or small number of markets | 51% | 46% | 51% | 56% | 85% | 45% | 58% | 67% | | | | Exposure to new ideas | 62% | 60% | 62% | 67% | 69% | 55% | 83% | 75% | | | | Increase the commercial life span of products and services | 46% | 39% | 45% | 56% | 62% | 52% | 42% | 83% | | | 4.7 Experience of Doing Business Overseas: Self-assessment

All companies currently doing business overseas were asked to summarise their level of experience on a scale of 1 to 4, where 1 meant ‘very experienced in overseas markets’ and 4 meant ‘not at all experienced in overseas markets’.

The vast majority of companies conceded that they were either ‘quite experienced’ (42%) or ‘very experienced’ (44%) in operating in overseas markets, with a sixth (16%) stating they felt ‘not very experienced’. As might be expected, and in parallel with last year’s survey, there is a link between company age, size of company and company’s overall assessment of their experience, with companies older than 5 years of age and those with more employees more likely to feel that they have higher levels of experience of conducting business overseas.

Despite this, the results differ somewhat from those of the 2008 survey. This is most marked for firms which indicated that they were very experienced in overseas markets; in 2008 only 26% of the sample indicated this level of experience, compared to 40% this year. A higher proportion of firms indicated that they were not very experienced in overseas markets in the 2008 survey (23% compared to 16% in this survey). A bias in the 2009 sample toward experienced exporters is corroborated by comparisons with PIMS survey data (Table 43). This is probably a reflection of the 2009 sample containing more experienced exporters as measured by the proportion of turnover from overseas markets and the number of markets in which firms are active.

Table 40: Self-assessment of experience in overseas markets

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |--------------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | 911 | 236 | 249 | 37 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Very experienced in overseas markets | 40% | 36% | 28% | 44% | | | | | 65% | 39% | | | | | | 43% | | | | | | 63% | | Quite experienced | 42% | 39% | 48% | 48% | | | | | 27% | 45% | | | | | | 47% | | | | | | 32% | | Not very experienced | 16% | 19% | 22% | 7% | | | | | 8% | 15% | | | | | | 10% | | | | | | 4% | | Not at all experienced in overseas markets | 1% | 3% | 2% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 0% | | | | | | 0% | | Don’t know | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 0% | | | | | | 0% | | Refused | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 1% | | | | | | 0% | | Considerers | 1% | 3% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 0% | | | | | | 1% |

There was a statistically significant difference in the experience rating of IP active companies compared to non-IP active companies. IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to state that they were ‘very experienced’ in operating in overseas markets. Table 41: Self-assessment of experience in overseas markets by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | IP active | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Very experienced in overseas markets | 45% | 42% | 32% | 65% | 65% | 34% | 46% | 66% | | Quite experienced | 43% | 45% | 49% | 35% | 23% | 52% | 51% | 29% | | Not very experienced | 10% | 8% | 19% | 0% | 12% | 13% | 3% | 4% | | Not at all experienced in overseas markets | 1% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Refused | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | Considerers | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

| Non-IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Non-IP active | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Very experienced in overseas markets | 34% | 32% | 26% | 10% | 64% | 44% | 38% | 52% | | Quite experienced | 42% | 34% | 48% | 70% | 36% | 39% | 38% | 44% | | Not very experienced | 21% | 27% | 23% | 20% | 0% | 16% | 24% | 4% | | Not at all experienced in overseas markets | 2% | 2% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Don’t know | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Considerers | 1% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

Similarly, there was a statistically significant difference in the experience rating of UKTI users and non-UKTI users. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to state that they were both ‘very experienced’ and ‘quite experienced’ in operating in overseas markets.

Table 42: Self-assessment of experience in overseas markets by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | UKTI users | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Very experienced in overseas markets | 42% | 39% | 32% | 44% | 54% | 38% | 50% | 63% | | Quite experienced | 44% | 43% | 48% | 56% | 38% | 49% | 39% | 32% | | Not very experienced | 13% | 16% | 18% | 0% | 8% | 12% | 11% | 4% | | Not at all experienced in overseas markets | 0% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Refused | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | Considerers | 0% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% |

| Non-UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Non-UKTI users | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Very experienced in overseas markets | 34% | 34% | 22% | 44% | 85% | 43% | 17% | 67% | | Quite experienced | 39% | 34% | 49% | 33% | 8% | 33% | 75% | 33% | | Not very experienced | 22% | 22% | 27% | 22% | 8% | 24% | 8% | 0% | | Not at all experienced in overseas markets | 2% | 4% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Don’t know | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Considerers | 2% | 5% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

In summary, UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to state that they were either ‘quite experienced’ or ‘very experienced’ in operating in overseas markets which is consistent with evidence from the PIMS surveys. However, this survey found a somewhat higher proportion of UKTI users to be very experienced in overseas markets (42%) compared to 34% and 27% in PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 respectively.

Table 43: Comparison of self-assessment of experience in overseas markets by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| Total | UKTI non-users | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|-----------------|---------------------|-----------------| | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Very experienced in overseas markets | 34% | 42% | 23% | 34% | 22% | 27% | | Quite experienced | 39% | 44% | 39% | 44% | 45% | 42% | | Not very experienced | 22% | 13% | 34% | 14% | 27% | 20% | | Not at all experienced in overseas markets | 2% | 0% | 4% | 2% | 4% | 4% | | Not currently exporting | - | - | 0% | 6% | 0% | 7% | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | - | - | - | - | | Considerers | 2% | 0% | - | - | - | - |

4.8 Overseas Experience: Number of Years Doing Business Overseas

All companies were asked to indicate how long ago their company had started to conduct business overseas.

There is clearly a strong correlation between the age of the company and the number of years conducting overseas business.

Compared to the 2008 survey, a higher proportion of firms have been active in overseas markets for at least 20 years (25% vs 18% in the 2008 survey).

Table 44: Company age by number of years doing business overseas

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Within last two years | 10% | 34% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 1% | | 2-5 years | 21% | 63% | 12% | 11% | 11% | 3% | 0% | 0% | | 6-10 years | 32% | 0% | 84% | 89% | 89% | 9% | 9% | 6% | | 11-20 years | 11% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 31% | 36% | 13% | | More than 20 years | 25% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 56% | 55% | 80% | | Don’t know/refused/Considerers | 1% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 1% |

There was a statistically significant difference in the longevity of conducting business overseas of IP active companies compared to non-IP active companies. IP active companies were more likely to have been conducting business overseas for a longer period of time than non-IP active companies. This is consistent with the proportion of IP active firms in the sample increasing with the age of company (Table 16). Thus, this result does not necessarily indicate that IP activity increases with the number of years of overseas experience; it may be driven by the age profile of IP active firms in the sample. Table 45: Number of years doing business overseas by IP activity

| IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Years doing business overseas | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | | Within last two years | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 2-5 years ago | 17% | 60% | 7% | 6% | 15% | 4% | | 6-10 years ago | 29% | 0% | 90% | 94% | 85% | 7% | | 11-20 years ago | 12% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 33% | | More than 20 years ago | 31% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 54% | | Don’t know/refused/Considerers | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% |

| Non-IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Years doing business overseas | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | | Within last two years | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 2-5 years ago | 24% | 65% | 15% | 20% | 0% | 1% | | 6-10 years ago | 36% | 0% | 81% | 80% | 100% | 11% | | 11-20 years ago | 9% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 29% | | More than 20 years ago | 19% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 58% | | Don’t know/refused/Considerers | 2% | 5% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

There was a statistically significant difference in the longevity of conducting business overseas of UKTI users compared to non-UKTI users. UKTI users were more likely to have been conducting business overseas for a longer period of time than non-UKTI users. Almost a third (31%) of UKTI users had been conducting business overseas for more than twenty years compared to just over one in ten (11%) non-UKTI users. This is consistent with the proportion of UKTI users in the sample increasing with the age of company (Table 17).

Table 46: Number of years doing business overseas by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | Years doing business overseas | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | | Within last two years | 9% | 34% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 1% | | 2-5 years ago | 18% | 65% | 10% | 6% | 13% | 3% | | 6-10 years ago | 30% | 0% | 86% | 94% | 88% | 8% | | 11-20 years ago | 11% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 28% | | More than 20 years ago | 31% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 59% | | Don’t know/refused/Considerers | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Years doing business overseas | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | | Within last two years | 13% | 34% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 2-5 years ago | 27% | 59% | 15% | 22% | 8% | 2% | | 6-10 years ago | 38% | 0% | 81% | 78% | 92% | 12% | | 11-20 years ago | 9% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 43% | | More than 20 years ago | 11% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 43% | | Don’t know/refused/Considerers | 2% | 7% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

However, PIMS data shows that less than one-quarter of UKTI clients have been conducting business overseas for more than 20 years. PIMS also shows that only 16% of UKTI clients have been conducting business overseas for 6-10 years, compared to 30% in this survey. These differences may partly be due to some of the sampling anomalies highlighted earlier in the chapter such as over sampling of: older and larger firms; firms in the production sector; and firms with more experience of overseas markets as measured by self-assessment and number of markets.

Table 47: Comparison of number of years experience in overseas markets by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| Years doing business overseas | Base | UKTI non-users | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | PIMS users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |------------------------------|------|----------------|------------|---------------------|----------------------|---------------------|----------------| | Total | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | Within last two years | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 2-5 years ago | 13% | 9% | 5% | 15% | 5% | 17% | | 6-10 years ago | 27% | 18% | 19% | 16% | 36% | 21% | | 11-20 years ago | 38% | 30% | 26% | 16% | 30% | 15% | | More than 20 years ago | 9% | 11% | 26% | 15% | 13% | 16% | | Not currently exporting | - | - | 2% | 13% | 2% | 7% | | Not applicable | 2% | 1% | - | - | - | - |

4.9 Experience: Born Globals

The following table shows the proportion of companies that are defined as ‘born global’. In this context ‘born globals’ were defined as firms which have been established for up to 5 years and have been doing business since they were established. Nearly a quarter (23%) of these internationalising companies were ‘born global’, which is higher than the proportions from the 2008 survey of one in ten companies (10%) which were ‘born global’. Whereas in the 2008 survey ‘born globals’ accounted for about half the sample firms which had been established in the last five years; in the 2009 survey, they accounted for 88% of these younger firms. This may reflect bias in the survey sample towards firms with more export experience.

Table 48: Born Globals

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Total | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | | Base | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Born global | 23% | 88% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Up to 5 years | 26% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | More than 5 years | 74% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

When the total sub samples of IP active and non-IP active firms are considered, almost equal proportions of the subgroups are ‘born globals’ (22% and 24% respectively). However, this reflects differences in the age profiles of the sub-samples. When only firms established for up to five years are considered, a higher proportion of IP active firms are born globals (93%) than non-IP active firms (84%). This is consistent with the concept that firms internationalise early due to their products and services being innovative and in niche markets. Consequently, internationalisation is needed in order to reach a sufficiently large market. Table 49: Born Globals by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Born global | 22% | 93% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Up to 5 years | 23% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | More than 5 years | 77% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

When the sub-sample of firms established for up to five years is considered, similar proportions of UKTI users (90%) and non-UKTI users (86%) are ‘born global’.

Table 50: Born Globals by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Born global | 19% | 90% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Up to 5 years | 22% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | More than 5 years | 78% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Born global | 30% | 86% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Up to 5 years | 35% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | More than 5 years | 65% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

4.10 Experience: Proportion of Turnover Accounted for by Overseas Sales

All companies currently doing business overseas were asked about their current/planned overseas business activity (ie selling goods or services to either businesses or individuals based abroad specifically in the last financial year) and approximately what percentage of their turnover was accounted for by overseas sales. Those unable to offer a percentage were presented with banded amounts and asked to indicate which one was the most relevant.

The following tables show overseas experience as measured by the proportion of turnover accounted for by overseas sales. For around four in ten companies up to 25% of their turnover is accounted for by overseas business, whilst for just over a third of companies (30%) over half of their turnover is accounted for by overseas business, as shown in the table below. Therefore, a higher proportion of the turnover from companies from this current research is accounted for by overseas business than was found in the 2008 survey. This is most marked for firms generating up to 10% of their turnover from overseas sales which accounted for half the 2008 sample but only one quarter of the current (2009) survey sample. This again indicates that this year’s survey contains firms with a greater level of experience in overseas markets than has been found in previous UKTI surveys.

Table 51: Proportion of turnover accounted for by overseas sales

| Total | 2008 survey | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|-------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 900 | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Zero | 5% | 1% | 2% | 1% | - | - | | | 1% | - | - | - | - | - | | Up to 10% | 51% | 24% | 30% | 28% | 22% | 19% | | | 15% | 11% | 19% | 12% | 17% | 21% | | 11-25% | 12% | 16% | 20% | 15% | 11% | 19% | | | 12% | 17% | 20% | 15% | 19% | 20% | | 26-50% | 14% | 22% | 19% | 20% | 37% | 24% | | | 25% | 26% | 20% | 20% | 26% | 20% | | 51-75% | 5% | 14% | 9% | 15% | 7% | 14% | | | 19% | 19% | 13% | 19% | 19% | 13% | | More than 75% | 11% | 20% | 16% | 18% | 22% | 24% | | | 26% | 21% | 19% | 26% | 21% | 19% | | Don’t know/ refused | 7% | 3% | 5% | 2% | - | - | | | 3% | - | - | 3% | - | - |

There was a statistically significant difference in the percentage of turnover accounted for by overseas sales between IP active and non-IP active companies. IP active companies are more likely to have a higher percentage of their turnover accounted for by overseas sales (ie more than 50%) than non-IP active companies.

Table 52: Proportion of turnover accounted for by overseas sales by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Zero | 0% | 1% | - | - | - | | | 1% | - | - | - | - | | Up to 10% | 19% | 26% | 23% | 12% | 23% | | | 11% | 14% | 15% | 16% | 22% | | 11-25% | 18% | 23% | 14% | 6% | 23% | | | 15% | 16% | 15% | 16% | 22% | | 26-50% | 21% | 19% | 16% | 41% | 15% | | | 28% | 30% | 17% | 17% | 17% | | 51-75% | 16% | 10% | 21% | 12% | 12% | | | 20% | 16% | 16% | 16% | 16% | | More than 75% | 23% | 17% | 24% | 29% | 27% | | | 24% | 24% | 23% | 23% | 23% | | Don’t know/ refused | 2% | 4% | 1% | - | - | | | 1% | - | - | - | - |

There was a statistically significant difference in the percentage of turnover accounted for by overseas sales between UKTI users and non-UKTI users. According to this survey, UKTI users were more likely to have in excess of 50% of their turnover accounted for by overseas sales than non-UKTI users (Table 53). However, evidence from PIMS demonstrates no difference in the proportion of users and non-users of UKTI services generating at least half their turnover from overseas sales, as shown below (Table 54). Table 53: Proportion of turnover accounted for by overseas sales by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Zero | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Up to 10% | 1% | 1% | 1% | - | - | 1% | - | - | | 11-25% | 20% | 27% | 22% | 11% | 25% | 13% | 15% | 22% | | 26-50% | 16% | 19% | 13% | 11% | 25% | 12% | 20% | 21% | | 51-75% | 23% | 21% | 21% | 50% | 29% | 24% | 24% | 20% | | More than 75% | 17% | 12% | 19% | 11% | 13% | 21% | 20% | 14% | | Don’t know/ refused | 3% | 3% | 3% | - | - | 3% | - | 5% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Zero | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Up to 10% | 31% | 34% | 37% | 44% | 8% | 21% | 25% | 17% | | 11-25% | 17% | 21% | 18% | 11% | 8% | 14% | 8% | 17% | | 26-50% | 20% | 15% | 20% | 11% | 15% | 29% | 33% | 25% | | 51-75% | 9% | 6% | 9% | 0% | 15% | 12% | 17% | 8% | | More than 75% | 19% | 16% | 14% | 33% | 54% | 24% | 17% | 25% | | Don’t know/ refused | 3% | 7% | 2% | - | - | 3% | - | 8% |

The following is a summary of the proportion of turnover accounted for by overseas sales by UKTI usage from this survey compared with the PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009.

Table 54: Comparison of proportion of turnover accounted for by overseas sales by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| Total | UKTI non-users | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |-------|----------------|------------|----------------------|------------------|---------------------|------------------| | | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Up to 10% | 31% | 20% | 46% | 25% | 39% | 30% | | 11-25% | 17% | 16% | 15% | 12% | 12% | 17% | | 26-50% | 20% | 23% | 13% | 13% | 17% | 16% | | 51-75% | 9% | 17% | 8% | 10% | 8% | 10% | | More than 75% | 19% | 20% | 14% | 20% | 14% | 12% | | Not currently exporting | - | - | 2% | 13% | 2% | 7% | | Not applicable | 4% | 4% | - | - | - | - | | Don’t know/refused | - | - | 2% | 7% | 8% | 7% |

4.11 Experience: Number of Markets

All companies currently conducting business overseas were asked to indicate the number of overseas countries they had done business in (in any form) over the last 5 years, excluding countries from which they had only imported. They were presented with numbers in bands and were asked to identify the most relevant. Later in the questionnaire, after indicating in which world regions they were active, they were also asked to state whether the number of countries in which they did business had increased, decreased or remained the same in the last three years. After this they were asked to specify whether over the next three years they expect the number of countries to do business with to increase, decrease or remain the same.

As can be seen from the following table six in ten (60%) of these companies were in 11 or more markets. This is twice the proportion in the 2008 survey for which the equivalent figure was 30%. This indicates that the 2009 sample contains firms with more export experience than that of 2008. The number of markets in which a firm operates tends to increase with age.

Table 55: Number of markets

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Considerers | 1% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | None | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | One country | 3% | 6% | 4% | 0% | 0% | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 2-5 countries | 15% | 24% | 21% | 11% | 11% | | | 11% | 11% | 10% | 5% | 1% | | 6-10 countries | 21% | 25% | 27% | 19% | 22% | | | 19% | 16% | 19% | 16% | 8% | | 11-20 countries | 22% | 17% | 25% | 30% | 11% | | | 28% | 28% | 28% | 14% | 14% | | 21-50 countries | 26% | 17% | 19% | 19% | 43% | | | 34% | 31% | 34% | 31% | 42% | | More than 50 countries | 12% | 8% | 4% | 22% | 14% | | | 9% | 21% | 9% | 21% | 34% | | Don't know | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding the number of countries in which they had done business in any form in the last 5 years. IP active companies were much more likely to be in more countries than non-IP active companies, with this propensity increasing by age. As with other experience measures, this may reflect the age profile of IP active firms in the sample (Table 16).

______________________________________________________________________

5 Two respondents stated they had not done business in any market over the last five years despite previously stating that they had sold directly to businesses or individuals abroad and had imported goods or services over the last five years. Table 56: Number of markets by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Considerers | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | | None | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | One country | 1% | 2% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 2-5 countries | 10% | 20% | 12% | 0% | 12% | 11% | 3% | 0% | | 6-10 countries | 15% | 21% | 23% | 12% | 15% | 13% | 11% | 5% | | 11-20 countries | 22% | 16% | 31% | 29% | 8% | 31% | 30% | 10% | | 21-50 countries | 33% | 26% | 26% | 29% | 46% | 32% | 35% | 46% | | More than 50 countries | 18% | 14% | 4% | 29% | 19% | 11% | 22% | 39% | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Considerers | 1% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | None | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | One country | 4% | 9% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 2-5 countries | 20% | 28% | 26% | 30% | 9% | 8% | 10% | 4% | | 6-10 countries | 27% | 29% | 28% | 30% | 36% | 24% | 24% | 20% | | 11-20 countries | 22% | 18% | 22% | 30% | 18% | 25% | 24% | 28% | | 21-50 countries | 19% | 9% | 15% | 0% | 36% | 36% | 24% | 28% | | More than 50 countries | 6% | 3% | 3% | 10% | 0% | 6% | 19% | 20% | | Don’t know | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding the number of countries in which they had done business in any form in the last 5 years. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users (14% vs 6%) to have conducted business in more than 50 countries in the last five years (Table 57). As for IP active firms, this may be related to the age profile of UKTI users in the survey sample (Table 17).

The equivalent data is not available from PIMS. Table 57: Number of markets by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | UKTI users | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Considerers | 0% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | | None | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | One country | 1% | 4% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 2-5 countries | 13% | 22% | 18% | 11% | 13% | 9% | 4% | 1% | | 6-10 countries | 19% | 23% | 25% | 22% | 25% | 18% | 15% | 7% | | 11-20 countries | 23% | 17% | 28% | 33% | 17% | 27% | 28% | 14% | | 21-50 countries | 28% | 19% | 20% | 17% | 38% | 34% | 33% | 42% | | More than 50 countries | 14% | 12% | 6% | 17% | 8% | 10% | 20% | 35% | | Don't know | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Non-UKTI users | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Considerers | 2% | 5% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | One country | 5% | 8% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | 2-5 countries | 21% | 27% | 27% | 11% | 8% | 12% | 8% | 0% | | 6-10 countries | 25% | 28% | 29% | 11% | 15% | 21% | 17% | 17% | | 11-20 countries | 20% | 17% | 22% | 22% | 0% | 31% | 25% | 17% | | 21-50 countries | 21% | 13% | 17% | 22% | 54% | 33% | 25% | 42% | | More than 50 countries | 6% | 3% | 0% | 33% | 23% | 2% | 25% | 25% |

4.12 Number of Regions

All companies were given a list of world regions and were asked to indicate in which their business was active. A definition of the EEA was provided for those who required it.

Most typically businesses were active in the EEA and Asia, with older and larger companies more likely to be active in Asia. Table 58 Overseas experience: region

| Total | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | EEA | 93% | 92% | 95% | 100% | 97% | 89% | 98% | 94% | | Russia and Eastern Europe, outside of the EEA | 54% | 47% | 42% | 70% | 73% | 56% | 66% | 75% | | USA/Canada | 63% | 53% | 58% | 78% | 81% | 63% | 79% | 80% | | Latin America and Caribbean | 45% | 38% | 28% | 52% | 73% | 49% | 52% | 75% | | Africa | 56% | 47% | 45% | 56% | 68% | 62% | 74% | 79% | | Middle East | 69% | 61% | 55% | 81% | 81% | 79% | 78% | 92% | | Asia | 73% | 63% | 61% | 81% | 89% | 82% | 83% | 92% | | Australia/New Zealand | 57% | 46% | 48% | 56% | 65% | 64% | 72% | 78% | | None6 | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 1% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding the number of regions they reported they were active in for their international business. A higher proportion of IP active respondents reported being in any of these regions than non-IP active respondents. Outside the EEA both groups were most likely to be in Asia, the Middle East and the USA/Canada and least likely to be in Latin America and the Caribbean. However, a higher proportion of IP active firms were in Russia and Eastern Europe outside the EEA than in Africa. For non-IP active firms, this order was reversed.

______________________________________________________________________

6 Four respondents stated they had not done business in any region despite previously stating that they had sold directly to businesses or individuals abroad and had imported goods or services over the last five years. They were not classified as ‘considerers’. Table 59: Overseas experience: region by IP activity

| IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |-----------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|-------|--------|------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | EEA | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Russia and E Europe | 96% | 95% | 99% | 100% | 100% | 93% | 100% | 95% | | USA/Canada | 65% | 57% | 54% | 76% | 73% | 63% | 78% | 81% | | Latin America/Caribbean | 70% | 58% | 62% | 88% | 85% | 68% | 81% | 84% | | Africa | 53% | 45% | 38% | 53% | 77% | 48% | 54% | 80% | | Middle East | 63% | 55% | 50% | 65% | 73% | 61% | 81% | 81% | | Asia | 79% | 76% | 63% | 88% | 85% | 78% | 84% | 93% | | Australia/New Zealand | 81% | 77% | 69% | 94% | 92% | 80% | 86% | 93% | | None | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

| Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 150 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | |---------------|------|-----|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----| | | | | | | | | | | | | EEA | 90% | 88% | 92% | 100% | 91% | 85% | 95% | 92% | | Russia and E Europe | 43% | 40% | 35% | 60% | 73% | 49% | 43% | 56% | | USA/Canada | 56% | 50% | 55% | 60% | 73% | 59% | 76% | 64% | | Latin America/Caribbean | 36% | 33% | 23% | 50% | 64% | 51% | 48% | 60% | | Africa | 49% | 40% | 43% | 40% | 55% | 63% | 62% | 72% | | Middle East | 60% | 50% | 51% | 70% | 73% | 79% | 67% | 88% | | Asia | 64% | 52% | 57% | 60% | 82% | 83% | 76% | 88% | | Australia/New Zealand | 45% | 36% | 42% | 30% | 36% | 57% | 62% | 68% | | None | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 9% | 1% | 0% | 4% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding the number of regions they reported they were active in for their international business. Although roughly the same proportion of UKTI users as non-users are active in the EEA, outside the EEA a higher proportion of UKTI users are in any one region than non-UKTI users. There are also differences in the apparent popularity of different regions for the two groups. Whereas UKTI users are almost equally likely to be in Asia and the Middle East (77% and 76% respectively), a higher proportion of non-UKTI users are in Asia than the Middle East (66% and 54% respectively). While for non-UKTI users, the USA/Canada is the third most popular region, for UKTI users, it falls behind EEA, Asia and the Middle East. The following table summarises the number of world regions that these businesses were operating in. This table illustrates that nearly three quarters of companies (73%) were conducting business in four or more regions. Again, this indicates that the survey sample is biased towards firms which are experienced in international activity.

### Table 61: Number of regions

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

IP active companies were more likely to be in four or more regions than non-IP active companies (84% vs 62%). This is consistent with the findings for the number of markets.

______________________________________________________________________

7 Four respondents stated they had not done business in any region despite previously stating that they had sold directly to businesses or individuals abroad and had imported goods or services over the last five years. They were not classified as ‘considerers’. in which respondents were active. As with other experience measures this may reflect the age profile of IP active firms in the sample (Table 16).

Table 62: Number of regions by IP activity

| IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | IP active | | | | | | | | | | None | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 1 region | 3% | 6% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 1% | | 2 regions | 5% | 10% | 7% | 0% | 4% | 4% | 0% | 0% | | 3 regions | 8% | 9% | 16% | 0% | 8% | 8% | 3% | 2% | | 4 or more regions | 84% | 75% | 72% | 100% | 88% | 85% | 97% | 96% |

| Non-IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | None | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 1 region | 13% | 22% | 18% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | 2 regions | 9% | 12% | 9% | 20% | 0% | 8% | 14% | 0% | | 3 regions | 14% | 15% | 19% | 0% | 9% | 11% | 10% | 4% | | 4 or more regions | 62% | 51% | 53% | 80% | 82% | 78% | 76% | 92% |

UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to be conducting business in four or more regions (78% vs 62%). This is consistent with the survey results showing the number of markets in which respondents were active. As with these results, the difference found between users and non-users of UKTI services may be related to the age profile of UKTI users in the survey sample (Table 17).

Table 63: Number of regions by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | UKTI users | | | | | | | | | | None | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 1 region | 5% | 10% | 9% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 1% | | 2 regions | 6% | 10% | 8% | 6% | 0% | 6% | 4% | 0% | | 3 regions | 10% | 13% | 17% | 0% | 13% | 9% | 2% | 2% | | 4 or more regions | 78% | 67% | 66% | 94% | 83% | 82% | 93% | 96% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Non-UKTI users | | | | | | | | | | None | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 1 region | 14% | 21% | 20% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | 2 region | 9% | 12% | 9% | 11% | 8% | 7% | 8% | 0% | | 3 region | 14% | 12% | 20% | 0% | 0% | 12% | 17% | 8% | | 4 or more regions | 62% | 55% | 51% | 89% | 92% | 79% | 75% | 92% |

4.13 Benefits of Expanding the Number of Overseas Markets in which a firm operates

All respondents were read a list of reasons which have been given for expanding the number of countries in which a business operates. Respondents were then asked to indicate the extent to which each applied to their business using a score between 1 and 5, where 1 meant that it was ‘not at all beneficial’ and 5 meant that this was ‘very beneficial’.

The main reasons for expanding the number of countries in which they operated were to enable them to meet growth objectives and to reduce dependence on a small number of markets. Among older firms with at least 50 employees, allowing full use of existing capacity was as important as, or slightly more important than, reducing dependence on a small number of markets.

Table 64: Reasons for expanding the number of countries in which a business operates

| Reason | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Enabling you to meet growth objectives | 911 | 67% | 62% | 68% | 74% | 76% | 63% | 69% | 76% | | Allowing you to fully utilise your existing capacity | 236 | 56% | 56% | 54% | 59% | 65% | 56% | 57% | 61% | | Reducing your dependence on a single or small number of markets | 249 | 60% | 60% | 59% | 59% | 62% | 61% | 53% | 61% | | Enabling you to offset declining revenues in other markets | 27 | 51% | 48% | 49% | 59% | 43% | 52% | 53% | 56% | | Enabling you to increase the commercial life span of any of your products or services | 37 | 39% | 38% | 37% | 48% | 32% | 38% | 43% | 44% | | Not selected beneficial rating to any of the 5 questions | 37 | 18% | 21% | 16% | 15% | 19% | 22% | 17% | 13% |

IP active companies were more likely to state each of these benefits were reasons for expanding the number of countries in which their company operates than non-IP active companies. Table 65: Reasons for expanding the number of countries in which a business operates by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Enabling you to meet growth objectives | 72% | 67% | 79% | 65% | 77% | 65% | 73% | 78% | | Allowing you to fully utilise your existing capacity | 61% | 56% | 62% | 59% | 65% | 62% | 65% | 64% | | Reducing your dependence on a single or small number of markets | 63% | 59% | 69% | 65% | 58% | 68% | 57% | 63% | | Enabling you to offset declining revenues in other markets | 54% | 51% | 52% | 65% | 42% | 55% | 59% | 57% | | Enabling you to increase the commercial life span of any of your products or services | 44% | 43% | 41% | 59% | 31% | 42% | 51% | 46% | | Not selected beneficial rating to any of the 5 questions | 14% | 20% | 9% | 18% | 15% | 16% | 14% | 10% |

| Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Enabling you to meet growth objectives | 62% | 57% | 62% | 90% | 73% | 62% | 62% | 68% | | Allowing you to fully utilise your existing capacity | 52% | 56% | 49% | 60% | 64% | 49% | 43% | 52% | | Reducing your dependence on a single or small number of markets | 56% | 61% | 54% | 50% | 73% | 54% | 48% | 56% | | Enabling you to offset declining revenues in other markets | 47% | 45% | 48% | 50% | 45% | 48% | 43% | 56% | | Enabling you to increase the commercial life span of any of your products or services | 34% | 34% | 35% | 30% | 36% | 33% | 29% | 40% | | Not selected beneficial rating to any of the 5 questions | 23% | 22% | 20% | 10% | 27% | 28% | 24% | 24% |

UKTI users were more likely to state each of these benefits were reasons for expanding the number of countries in which their company operates than non-UKTI users. Table 66: Reasons for expanding the number of countries in which a business operates by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Enabling you to meet growth objectives | 70% | 70% | 74% | 78% | 71% | 64% | 67% | 73% | | Allowing you to fully utilise your existing capacity | 60% | 64% | 57% | 61% | 63% | 59% | 57% | 58% | | Reducing your dependence on a single or small number of markets | 63% | 65% | 64% | 78% | 63% | 64% | 54% | 58% | | Enabling you to offset declining revenues in other markets | 54% | 53% | 53% | 72% | 42% | 53% | 57% | 55% | | Enabling you to increase the commercial life span of any of your products or services | 41% | 44% | 38% | 56% | 38% | 39% | 46% | 43% | | Not selected beneficial rating to any of the 5 questions | 17% | 19% | 13% | 11% | 21% | 20% | 17% | 15% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | |----------------|------|-----|-----|-----|---|----|----|----|----| | | | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Enabling you to meet growth objectives | 60% | 50% | 59% | 67% | 85% | 60% | 75% | 100% | | Allowing you to fully utilise your existing capacity | 50% | 46% | 49% | 56% | 69% | 43% | 58% | 83% | | Reducing your dependence on a single or small number of markets | 53% | 53% | 53% | 22% | 62% | 50% | 50% | 83% | | Enabling you to offset declining revenues in other markets | 44% | 42% | 44% | 33% | 46% | 45% | 42% | 67% | | Enabling you to increase the commercial life span of any of your products or services | 34% | 30% | 37% | 33% | 23% | 33% | 33% | 58% | | Not selected beneficial rating to any of the 5 questions | 22% | 24% | 21% | 22% | 15% | 31% | 17% | 0% |

4.14 Innovative Companies

Information on the engagement of employees in R&D and new product (or service) development activity, externally commissioned product (or service) development and sales of new products and services has been used to classify firms as either ‘innovative’ or ‘non-innovative’. The details of this classification are provided below, which is similar to the definition used in both the equivalent 2008 survey and the PIMS survey.

Table 67: Loose definition of ‘Innovative’ companies

Companies have been classified as ‘innovative’ if they...

- Have more than one employee engaged either wholly or partly in R&D activity (Q77) and have more than one employee engaged either wholly or partly in new product or service development (Q79)
- Or, have employed someone external to the business to conduct new product or service development activity in the last year (Q80).

The key difference is that it omits the following criterion:

- Or, derive some of their turnover from products & services introduced in the last 3 years except firms established in the last 2 years Another ‘tighter’ definition of innovation was constructed that also considers whether employees have been engaged in R&D activity in ‘the development of scientific or technical knowledge that is not commonly available’ and whether any new products they have developed can be described as ‘novel’ (ie new to the sector or new to the world as opposed to just new to their business).

Table 68: Tight definition of ‘Innovative’ companies

| Firms have been classified as ‘innovative’ under the alternative (tight) definition if they… | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | • Have more than one employee engaged either wholly or partly in R&D activity (Q77) and have more than one employee engaged either wholly or partly in new product or service development (Q79) | | • Or, have employed someone external to the business to conduct new product or service development activity in the last year (Q80). | | • Or, their products & services are completely new and have not been introduced by anyone else previously (Q76). |

This was similar to the tighter definition of innovative firms used in PIMS and the 2008 survey, but with the omission of the following criteria:

• Or, derive at least some of their turnover from products & services introduced in the last 3 years except firms established in the last 2 years and these products & services are completely new and have not been introduced by anyone else previously.

The following table summarises the proportion of companies that can be defined as innovative using both definitions. Using this ‘loose’ definition just under two thirds (60%) of companies were defined as being innovative, compared to nearly three quarters (72%) in the 2008 survey. In comparison, the proportion of companies defined as innovative using the tight definition (48%) is almost identical to the findings in the 2008 survey (47%). Firms identified as innovative using the tight definition, form a subset of innovative firms defined using the loose definition.

Table 69: Innovative firms

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Loose definition | 60% | 54% | 50% | 81% | 86% | 53% | 78% | 81% | | Tight definition | 48% | 45% | 41% | 70% | 59% | 45% | 62% | 58% | | IP active | 50% | 45% | 36% | 63% | 70% | 49% | 64% | 77% | | Neither Innovative nor IP active | 28% | 33% | 35% | 15% | 11% | 31% | 14% | 9% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding whether or not they were innovative. As might be expected, a higher proportion of IP active, than non-IP active firms are innovative. Using the ‘loose’ definition, over three quarters (77%) of IP active companies were defined as innovative using the ‘loose’ definition, compared to just over four in ten (42%) of non-IP active companies. When the tight definition is applied, almost two thirds (62%) of IP active firms, but only one third (34%) of non-IP active firms are innovative. Similarly, there was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding whether or not they were innovative. Nearly two thirds (64%) of UKTI users were defined as innovative using the ‘loose’ definition, reducing to just over half (52%) of companies using the ‘tight’ definition of innovative. In comparison, half (50%) of the non-UKTI users are defined as innovative using the ‘loose’ definition, reducing to just under four in ten (38%) of companies using the ‘tight’ definition. Therefore, a higher proportion of UKTI users than non-UKTI users are defined as innovative, using both the ‘loose’ and the ‘tight’ definitions. Over half (56%) of UKTI users are IP active compared to less than four in ten (38%) of non-users. Again, this indicates that UKTI users are more innovative than non-users.

Table 71: Innovative firms by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Loose definition | 64% | 64% | 52% | 83% | 88% | 56% | 76% | 80% | | Tight definition | 52% | 53% | 43% | 83% | 71% | 49% | 63% | 57% | | IP active | 56% | 58% | 40% | 67% | 67% | 52% | 65% | 76% | | Non Innovative or IP active | 23% | 25% | 32% | 11% | 13% | 27% | 13% | 10% |

| Non-UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Loose definition | 50% | 42% | 47% | 78% | 85% | 43% | 83% | 92% | | Tight definition | 38% | 34% | 39% | 44% | 38% | 33% | 59% | 67% | | IP active | 38% | 29% | 31% | 56% | 77% | 40% | 58% | 83% | | Non Innovative or IP active | 37% | 43% | 40% | 22% | 8% | 43% | 17% | 0% |

However, the proportions in this current survey for the ‘loose’ definition of innovative companies are somewhat lower than the 80% indicated consistently by PIMS. Table 72: Comparison of innovative firms (loose definition) by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| UKTI users | Base | Total | UKTI non-users | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |------------|------|-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|-----------------|---------------------|-----------------| | | | | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Innovative | | | 50% | 64% | 71% | 82% | 80% | 80% |

4.15 IP Active Companies

The following is the definition used to define whether companies were considered IP active or not.

Table 73: Definition of IP active

Companies have been classified as ‘IP active’ if they currently hold any patents or trademarks, either in the UK or overseas (Q81).

The following Table 74 summarises the proportion of companies that have been defined as IP active. The incidence of IP activity increases with both company age and size, as was also evident for the 2008 survey. In this survey half of the companies were defined as being IP active in comparison to just under a third in the 2008 survey.

Table 74: IP activity

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 50% | 45% | 36% | 63% | 70% | 49% | 64% | 77% | | No/Don’t Know | 50% | 55% | 64% | 37% | 30% | 51% | 36% | 23% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding whether or not they were IP active. A higher proportion of UKTI users were IP active than was evident among non-UKTI users.

Table 75: IP activity by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 56% | 58% | 40% | 67% | 67% | 52% | 65% | 76% | | No/Don’t Know | 44% | 42% | 60% | 33% | 33% | 48% | 35% | 24% |

| Non-UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 38% | 29% | 31% | 56% | 77% | 40% | 58% | 83% | | No/Don’t Know | 62% | 71% | 69% | 44% | 23% | 60% | 42% | 17% |

The higher proportion of UKTI users who were IP active is consistent with evidence from the PIMS survey. Table 76: Comparison of IP active firms by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and PIMS 4-7 user follow-up interviews and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| | Total | UKTI non-users | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 4-7 | |------------------|-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|----------------| | UKTI users | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 459 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | IP active | | 56% | 38% | 18% | 46% | 26% | 52% |

4.16 Young Technology Intensive Firms

Companies that are aged up to 5 years old which were classified as either ‘innovative’ or IP active under the previous definitions have also been classified as ‘young, technology intensive firms’.

Although the proportion of these firms in the total sample was slightly higher than in 2008 (17% vs 14%), the proportion in the sub-sample of firms established up to five years ago was lower (66% vs 74%).

Table 77: Young, technology intensive firms

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Young technology intensive | 17% | 66% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Up to 5 years | 26% | 100% | 0% | 0% | | More than 5 years| 74% | 0% | 100% | 100% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding whether or not they were young, technology intensive. Given the definition of young technology intensive firms used in this study, it is not surprising that all (100%) IP active companies established for up to five years were ‘young technology intensive’ firms compared to only 37% of non-IP active firms in this age group. Young technology firms in the non-IP active sub-sample represent firms established for up to 5 years which are not IP active but can be classified as innovative.

Table 78: Young, technology intensive firms by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | IP active | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Young technology intensive | 23% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Up to 5 years | 23% | 100% | 0% | 0% | | More than 5 years| 77% | 0% | 100% | 100% |

| Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Young technology intensive | 11% | 37% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Up to 5 years | 28% | 100% | 0% | 0% | | More than 5 years| 72% | 0% | 100% | 100% | UKTI users and non-UKTI users were equally likely to be defined as ‘young, technology intensive’ when the separate groups were considered. However, among firms of the relevant age category, ie up to 5 years, the incidence of young, technology intensive firms is higher amongst UKTI users than non-UKTI users (74% vs 54%). This is consistent with the observation that UKTI users are more likely to be classified as innovative or IP active than non-UKTI users.

Table 79: Young, technology intensive firms by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Young technology intensive | 16% | 74% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Up to 5 years | 22% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | More than 5 years| 78% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Young technology intensive | 19% | 54% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Up to 5 years | 35% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | More than 5 years| 65% | 0% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |

4.17 Past Growth (Turnover)

All companies were asked to indicate whether, compared to this time three years ago, their turnover was much higher, a bit higher, lower, or had stayed the same.

For just over six in ten companies (61%) their turnover was higher than it was three years ago. However, 37% of firms indicated that their turnover was lower or was about the same as it was three years ago. This compares with 30% in the 2008 survey.

Table 80: Past growth (turnover)

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | Base | 789 | 114 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Much higher | 27% | 33% | 30% | 22% | 49% | 18% | 21% | 28% | | A bit higher | 34% | 31% | 33% | 30% | 16% | 35% | 45% | 42% | | About the same size | 18% | 18% | 16% | 33% | 8% | 21% | 21% | 13% | | Lower | 19% | 18% | 21% | 15% | 24% | 22% | 9% | 16% | | Don’t know | 2% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 3% | 5% | 2% |

IP active and non-IP active companies reported similar levels of increases and decreases in company turnover over the last three years. Table 81: Past growth (turnover) by IP activity 6-10 years

10+ years

Total

Up to 5 years

0 - 49

50 - 99

100 +

0 - 49

50 - 99

396

46

90

17

26

97

37

83

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Much higher

28%

33%

33%

24%

42%

20%

14%

30%

A bit higher

35%

28%

28%

29%

19%

37%

51%

43%

About the same size

18%

17%

20%

35%

12%

21%

24%

8%

Lower

17%

22%

18%

12%

27%

20%

5%

16%

Don’t know

2%

0%

1%

0%

0%

3%

5%

2%

IP active

Base

393

68

159

10

11

99

21

25

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Much higher

26%

34%

28%

20%

64%

16%

33%

20%

A bit higher

33%

32%

35%

30%

9%

33%

33%

36%

About the same size

17%

18%

13%

30%

0%

22%

14%

28%

Lower

21%

16%

23%

20%

18%

25%

14%

16%

Don’t know

2%

0%

1%

0%

9%

3%

5%

0%

Non-IP active

Base

100 +

Similarly UKTI users and non-UKTI users reported similar levels of increases and decreases in company turnover over the last three years. Table 82: Past growth (turnover) by UKTI usage 6-10 years

Up to 5 years

0 - 49

547

61

148

100%

100%

100%

Much higher

28%

39%

32%

A bit higher

33%

20%

About the same size

17%

20%

Lower

20%

Don’t know

2%

Total UKTI users

Base

10+ years 100 +

0 - 49

50 - 99

100 +

18

24

154

46

96

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

11%

42%

21%

24%

27%

31%

33%

13%

36%

46%

41%

15%

39%

13%

19%

20%

14%

21%

21%

17%

29%

22%

7%

18%

0%

1%

0%

4%

2%

4%

1%

242

53

101

9

13

42

12

12

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Much higher

25%

26%

27%

44%

62%

7%

8%

33%

A bit higher

36%

43%

35%

22%

23%

31%

42%

50%

About the same size

18%

15%

17%

22%

0%

31%

25%

8%

Lower

18%

15%

21%

11%

15%

24%

17%

0%

Don’t know

2%

0%

1%

0%

0%

7%

8%

8%

Non-UKTI users

Base

50 - 99

4.18 Past Growth (Number of Markets) All companies were asked to indicate whether the number of countries in which they were doing business overseas has increased or decreased in the last three years. Just over six in ten companies (61%) indicated an increase in the number of countries in which they were conducting business in the last three years, which was especially true for older companies.

Accent

UKTI Evaluation Final Report November 2010.doc•TM•12.07.10

Page 42 of 42

Table 83: Past growth (number of markets)

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Increased | 61% | 56% | 59% | 67% | 68% | | | | | 62% | 74% | 59% | | Decreased | 10% | 11% | 8% | 7% | 11% | | | | | 10% | 3% | 13% | | Stayed the same| 28% | 29% | 31% | 26% | 22% | | | | | 28% | 21% | 26% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 2% | 1% | | Not Applicable | 1% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding the number of countries in which they had done business in any form in the last 3 years. IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to indicate an increase in the number of countries in which they were doing business over the last three years.

Table 84: Past growth (number of markets) by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Increased | 66% | 61% | 67% | 76% | 69% | | | | | 65% | 78% | 65% | | Decreased | 10% | 10% | 10% | 12% | 15% | | | | | 7% | 5% | 12% | | Stayed the same| 23% | 25% | 23% | 12% | 15% | | | | | 27% | 16% | 22% | | Don’t know | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Not Applicable | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding the number of countries in which they had done business in any form in the last 3 years. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to indicate an increase in the number of countries in which they were doing business over the last three years, which was especially true for medium sized companies.

______________________________________________________________________

8 In this table ‘Not Applicable’ refers to those companies that are not currently exporting or who have been active in overseas markets for less than 3 years.

9 In this table ‘Not Applicable’ refers to those companies that are not currently exporting or who have been active in overseas markets for less than 3 years.

10 In this table ‘Not Applicable’ refers to those companies that are not currently exporting or who have been active in overseas markets for less than 3 years. Table 85: Past growth (number of markets) by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|------|------------|-----------| | | Total| Up to 5 years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Increased | 100% | 64% | 61% | 63% | 72% | 63% | 66% | 76% | 58% | | Decreased | 10% | 10% | 12% | 9% | 11% | 13% | 11% | 4% | 13% | | Stayed the same | 24% | 24% | 27% | 17% | 25% | 23% | 17% | 27% | | Don’t know | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 1% | | Not Applicable | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 1% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|------------|-----------| | | Total| Up to 5 years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Increased | 100% | 54% | 50% | 54% | 56% | 77% | 50% | 67% | 67% | | Decreased | 8% | 9% | 8% | 0% | 8% | 5% | 0% | 17% | | Stayed the same | 36% | 35% | 37% | 44% | 15% | 45% | 33% | 17% | | Don’t know | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Not Applicable | 2% | 5% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

4.19 Past Growth: Employment

Companies that had been established for at least three years were asked to compare the number of people they employed currently with the number employed three years ago. Those who indicated that their employee numbers had grown were also asked to indicate the number of people that were employed by their company three years ago. This data has been combined into a single indicator of past growth as shown below.

Table 86: Past growth (employment)

Companies have been classified as having ‘decreased’ if…

- Their employee numbers have decreased over the last 3 years (Q69)

Companies have been classified as having ‘stayed the same’ if…

- Their employee numbers are the same as they were 3 years ago (Q69)

Companies have been classified as having ‘grown slightly’ if…

- Their employee numbers have grown by less than 30% over the last 3 years (Q71)

Companies have been classified as having ‘grown moderately’ if…

11 In this table ‘Not Applicable’ refers to those companies that are not currently exporting or who have been active in overseas markets for less than 3 years.

12 In this table ‘Not Applicable’ refers to those companies that are not currently exporting or who have been active in overseas markets for less than 3 years. • Their employee numbers have grown by between 30-75% over the last 3 years (Q71)

Companies have been classified as having ‘grown substantially’ if…

• Their employee numbers have grown by more than 75% over the last 3 years (Q71).

Overall 27% of respondents in the 2009 survey indicated that their company had grown, compared to 30% in the 2008 survey. The proportion of firms indicating that they had grown moderately was similar in the 2008 (12%) and 2009 (13%) surveys. However, the proportion that had grown substantially was somewhat lower in the 2009 survey (6%) than in 2008 (13%). Firms which reported having grown moderately or substantially over the past three years tended to have been established 6-10 years.

In the 2008 survey about a sixth (16%) of companies had become smaller and just over four in ten (43%) had stayed the same size when growth was measured in terms of changes in employee numbers. However, the proportion of companies in this 2009 survey reporting that they had become smaller was higher, at around one quarter (25%), whilst the proportion which had stayed the same size was lower (33%) than recorded in the 2008 survey. Firms which were both older and larger were more likely to experience a decrease in employee numbers in the past three years.

Table 87: Past growth (employment)

| Total | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Became smaller | 25% | 14% | 24% | 33% | 24% | 26% | 40% | 39% | | Stayed the same size | 33% | 16% | 44% | 33% | 30% | 48% | 21% | 27% | | Grown slightly | 8% | 5% | 5% | 4% | 14% | 11% | 14% | 13% | | Grown moderately | 13% | 6% | 20% | 15% | 16% | 10% | 14% | 10% | | Grown substantially | 6% | 6% | 7% | 11% | 8% | 3% | 7% | 6% | | Not Applicable | 16% | 53% | 0% | 4% | 8% | 2% | 5% | 6% |

Non-IP active companies were slightly more likely to have stayed the same size. This was most notable amongst firms which had been established for up to 5 years: of those that were not IP active, 20% had remained the same size compared to 10% of those which were IP active. IP active companies were slightly more likely than non-IP active firms to have become smaller in terms of employee numbers. IP active and non-IP active companies were as likely to have grown in the last three years.

13 In this table ‘Not applicable’ refers to those companies that are less than 3 years old or did not know their change in growth in terms of employees over the last 3 years. Table 88: Past growth (employment) by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | |-----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|---------|-------|--------|---------|-------| | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Become smaller | 28% | 18% | 21% | 41% | 31% | 27% | 41% | 40% | | | | Stayed the same | 29% | 10% | 41% | 29% | 31% | 43% | 22% | 27% | | | | Grown slightly | 9% | 5% | 6% | 0% | 15% | 11% | 16% | 12% | | | | Grown moderately| 13% | 7% | 24% | 12% | 15% | 13% | 11% | 10% | | | | Grown substantially | 6% | 4% | 8% | 18% | 4% | 4% | 5% | 6% | | | | Not Applicable | 15% | 57% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 1% | 5% | 6% | | |

| Non-IP active | Base | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | |-----------------|------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----| | | 100% | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Become smaller | 22% | 12% | 25% | 20% | 9% | 25% | 38% | 36% | | Stayed the same | 37% | 20% | 46% | 40% | 27% | 54% | 19% | 28% | | Grown slightly | 7% | 5% | 4% | 10% | 9% | 10% | 10% | 16% | | Grown moderately| 12% | 6% | 18% | 20% | 18% | 7% | 19% | 12% | | Grown substantially | 6% | 7% | 7% | 0% | 18% | 2% | 10% | 4% | | Not Applicable | 16% | 50% | 0% | 10% | 18% | 2% | 5% | 4% |

The profile of UKTI users and non-users in terms of past growth is similar, with around a third of companies remaining the same size and around a quarter of companies becoming smaller. However, this is not consistent with evidence from PIMS.

______________________________________________________________________

14 In this table ‘Not applicable’ refers to those companies that are less than 3 years old or did not know their change in growth in terms of employees over the last 3 years.

15 In this table ‘Not applicable’ refers to those companies that are less than 3 years old or did not know their change in growth in terms of employees over the last 3 years. Table 89: Past growth (employment) by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Became smaller | | 26% | 13% | 27% | 39% | 21% | 27% | 35% | 39% | | Stayed the same | | 33% | 16% | 41% | 28% | 33% | 48% | 22% | 27% | | Grown slightly | | 9% | 4% | 5% | 6% | 8% | 10% | 15% | 15% | | Grown moderately | | 13% | 6% | 20% | 22% | 17% | 11% | 13% | 10% | | Grown substantially | | 5% | 4% | 7% | 0% | 8% | 3% | 9% | 5% | | Not Applicable | | 14% | 56% | 0% | 6% | 13% | 1% | 7% | 4% |

| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Became smaller | | 22% | 16% | 19% | 22% | 31% | 24% | 58% | 42% | | Stayed the same | | 34% | 16% | 49% | 44% | 23% | 50% | 17% | 25% | | Grown slightly | | 7% | 5% | 5% | 0% | 23% | 12% | 8% | 0% | | Grown moderately | | 12% | 7% | 21% | 0% | 15% | 7% | 17% | 8% | | Grown substantially | | 7% | 7% | 7% | 33% | 8% | 2% | 0% | 8% | | Not Applicable | | 19% | 50% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 5% | 0% | 17% |

Evidence from the PIMS user and non-user surveys demonstrates that UKTI users are more likely to report having grown substantially and less likely to have reported having become smaller than firms which have not used UKTI services.

Table 90: Comparison of firm growth (employment) by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and PIMS 7-10 and PIMS Non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| | Total | UKTI non-users | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |------------------|-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|------------------| | UKTI users | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Became smaller | | 22% | 26% | 13% | 4% | 9% | 5% | | Stayed the same | | 34% | 33% | 22% | 15% | 15% | 16% | | Grown slightly | | 7% | 9% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Grown moderately | | 12% | 13% | 50% | 47% | 57% | 46% | | Grown substantially | | 7% | 5% | 13% | 28% | 19% | 30% | | Not Applicable | | 19% | 14% | 1% | 4% | 2% | 0% |

16 In this table ‘Not applicable’ refers to those companies that are less than 3 years old or did not know their change in growth in terms of employees over the last 3 years.

17 In this table ‘Not applicable’ refers to those companies that are less than 3 years old or did not know their change in growth in terms of employees over the last 3 years.

18 PIMS user and non-user surveys asked about growth over the previous 5 years, whereas the current survey asked over the previous 3 years. Also note that the PIMS surveys do not identify firms which grew slightly. 4.20 Future Growth

Future Growth (Number of Markets)

Those companies who had conducted business in at least one overseas country in the last five years were asked to indicate whether the number of countries in which they would do business overseas over the next three years was likely to increase, decrease or stay the same.

Just over six in ten companies (61%) projected an increase in the number of countries in which they expected to do business over the next three years. Firms with 50-99 employees were more likely to expect to increase the number of markets in which they do business.

Table 91: Future growth (number of markets)

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | 899 | 228 | 247 | 27 | 37 | 195 | 58 | 107 | | Increase | 61% | 65% | 62% | 70% | 57% | 56% | 72% | 55% | | Decrease | 3% | 3% | 2% | 4% | 5% | 4% | 3% | 2% | | Stay the same | 34% | 30% | 36% | 26% | 35% | 38% | 24% | 40% | | Don’t know | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 2% | 0% | 3% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding the number of countries they are likely to do business in over the next three years. IP active companies are more likely to predict an increase in the number of countries they do business in over the next three years than non-IP active companies. This was especially true of younger IP active companies.

Table 92: Whether number of countries doing business in will increase or decrease in the next three years by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | IP active | 453 | 105 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 96 | 37 | 82 | | Increase | 68% | 73% | 74% | 71% | 50% | 63% | 78% | 60% | | Decrease | 2% | 3% | 1% | 6% | 8% | 2% | 5% | 0% | | Stay the same | 29% | 22% | 24% | 24% | 38% | 34% | 16% | 39% | | Don’t know | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 1% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Non-IP active | 446 | 123 | 157 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Increase | 55% | 59% | 54% | 70% | 73% | 49% | 62% | 40% | | Decrease | 3% | 2% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 6% | 0% | 8% | | Stay the same | 40% | 37% | 43% | 30% | 27% | 42% | 38% | 44% | | Don’t know | 2% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 8% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding the number of countries they are likely to do business in over the next three years. UKTI users were more likely to indicate an increase in the number of countries in which they are doing business over the next three years than non-UKTI users. This is especially true of younger companies and those with 50-99 employees. Table 93: Whether number of countries doing business in will increase or decrease in the next three years by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 614 | 132 | 146 | 18 | 24 | 153 | 46 | 95 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Increase | | 65% | 71% | 68% | 72% | 58% | 62% | 74% | 53% | | Decrease | | 2% | 2% | 2% | 6% | 4% | 3% | 4% | 2% | | Stay the same | | 31% | 26% | 29% | 22% | 33% | 33% | 22% | 42% | | Don’t know | | 2% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 2% | 0% | 3% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 285 | 96 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Increase | | 53% | 57% | 52% | 67% | 54% | 33% | 67% | 75% | | Decrease | | 4% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 8% | 10% | 0% | 0% | | Stay the same | | 42% | 36% | 47% | 33% | 36% | 57% | 33% | 25% | | Don’t know | | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

Future Growth (objectives)

All companies, with the exception of those not yet trading, were asked to consider their business as a whole, and to state what growth objectives their company had for the business over the next five years in terms of whether they would remain the same size, become smaller, grow moderately or grow substantially in this time period. The business objectives for all companies is summarised in the following table.

Nearly six in ten (57%) of these companies stated that their growth objective for the next five years was to grow moderately, compared to half (50%) of the companies in 2008. Whilst just under a third (31%) of companies in the 2008 survey stated that their growth objective was to ‘grow substantially’ this was reduced slightly to 28% in the 2009 survey. Companies which had been established for up to 10 years were more likely to indicate an expectation that they would grow substantially in the next five years.

Table 94: Future growth

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Become smaller | | 1% | 0% | 1% | 4% | 0% | 3% | 3% | 1% | | Remain the same size | | 11% | 9% | 10% | 15% | 3% | 20% | 7% | 7% | | Grow moderately | | 57% | 57% | 60% | 41% | 57% | 54% | 64% | 56% | | Grow substantially | | 28% | 30% | 29% | 37% | 41% | 20% | 26% | 31% | | Don’t know | | 2% | 4% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 4% | | Refused | | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 1% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their future growth predictions over the next five years. IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active firms to state that their business objective was to ‘grow substantially’ in the next 5 years. Table 95: Future growth by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Become smaller | 1% | 0% | 1% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 0% | | Remain the same size | 8% | 6% | 4% | 12% | 4% | 16% | 3% | 10% | | Grow moderately | 55% | 51% | 60% | 41% | 50% | 56% | 73% | 51% | | Grow substantially | 34% | 39% | 33% | 41% | 46% | 26% | 22% | 36% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 2% | | Refused | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

| Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | |---------------|------|-----|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----| | | | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Become smaller | 2% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 6% | 5% | 4% | | Remain the same size | 14% | 12% | 14% | 20% | 0% | 23% | 14% | 0% | | Grow moderately | 59% | 61% | 60% | 40% | 73% | 52% | 48% | 76% | | Grow substantially | 22% | 22% | 26% | 30% | 27% | 15% | 33% | 12% | | Don’t know | 3% | 5% | 0% | 10% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 8% | | Refused | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% |

Both UKTI users and non-UKTI users had similar expectations for growth for the next five years, with similar proportions predicting growth or reductions.

Table 96: Future growth by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Become smaller | 1% | 0% | 0% | 6% | 0% | 3% | 4% | 1% | | Remain the same size | 10% | 6% | 7% | 11% | 0% | 21% | 9% | 8% | | Grow moderately | 57% | 60% | 61% | 50% | 58% | 51% | 63% | 55% | | Grow substantially | 29% | 29% | 31% | 33% | 42% | 23% | 24% | 31% | | Don’t know | 2% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 4% | | Refused | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | |----------------|------|-----|-----|----|---|----|----|----|----| | | | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Become smaller | 1% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 5% | 0% | 0% | | Remain the same size | 13% | 13% | 15% | 22% | 8% | 17% | 0% | 0% | | Grow moderately | 56% | 52% | 57% | 22% | 54% | 62% | 67% | 67% | | Grow substantially | 26% | 31% | 25% | 44% | 38% | 10% | 33% | 25% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 0% | 11% | 0% | 5% | 0% | 0% | | Refused | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 8% |

However, PIMS data shows UKTI users to be less likely than non-UKTI users to be considering staying the same size and more likely than non-users to aim to grow substantially. Table 97: Comparison of plans for future firm growth by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and PIMS 7-10 and PIMS Non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| UKTI users | Base | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS Non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |------------|------|------------|---------------------|-----------------|---------------------|-----------------| | | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Become smaller | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 5% | 1% | | Remain the same size | 13% | 10% | 24% | 8% | 10% | 5% | | Grown moderately | 56% | 57% | 52% | 48% | 57% | 50% | | Grown substantially | 26% | 29% | 18% | 38% | 27% | 41% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 5% | 5% | 2% | 4% | | Refused | 1% | 0% | | | | | | Not Applicable | 0% | 1% | | | | |

4.21 Growth – ASBS Definition

Companies were divided into four ‘growth categories’, as described in the box below; a categorisation that takes account of both past and future growth. This analysis has sought to replicate, as far as is possible with the data available, an analysis of growth conducted for BERR’s Annual Small Business Survey (ASBS).

Table 98: Definition of Growth – ASBS definition

| Companies have been classified as displaying ‘sustained growth’ if… | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | • Their employee numbers have grown over the last 3 years (Q69) | | • And, they are anticipating substantial growth over the next 5 years (Q85) |

| Companies have been classified as displaying ‘contained growth’ if… | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | • Their employee numbers have grown over the last 3 years (Q69) | | • But, they are not anticipating substantial growth over the next 5 years (Q85) |

| Companies have been classified as displaying ‘new growth’ if… | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | • Their employee numbers have not grown over the last 3 years including firms established in the last 3 years (Q69) | | • But, they are anticipating substantial growth over the next 5 years (Q85) |

| Companies have been classified as displaying ‘no growth’ if… | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | • Their employee numbers have not grown over the last 3 years including firms established in the last 3 years (Q69) | | • And, they are not anticipating substantial growth over the next 5 years (Q85). |

According to the ASBS definition of growth, 39% of the sample firms displayed growth, which was below the 47% of growth observed in the 2008 survey. When the types of growth are analysed, a similar pattern is observed to the 2008 survey with a fairly even split between ‘sustained growth’, ‘contained growth’ and ‘new growth’. The following table also illustrates that according to the ASBS definition of growth, older companies and also smaller companies were more likely to predict ‘no growth’.

Table 99: ASBS definition of growth

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Sustained | 12% | 6% | 12% | 19% | 24% | | | | | 11% | 17% | 17% | | Contained | 15% | 11% | 21% | 19% | 19% | | | | | 11% | 21% | 14% | | New growth | 12% | 7% | 16% | 19% | 16% | | | | | 9% | 9% | 13% | | No growth | 43% | 18% | 49% | 41% | 38% | | | | | 62% | 52% | 49% | | Established less than 3 years/not yet trading | 18% | 58% | 2% | 4% | 3% | | | | | 7% | 2% | 7% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their future growth predictions. IP active companies were more likely to predict ‘new growth’ and ‘sustained growth’ than non-IP active companies. New growth is predicted more by IP active companies aged six to ten years of age.

Table 100: ASBS definition of growth by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Sustained | 14% | 6% | 14% | 24% | 23% | | | | | 15% | 11% | 19% | | Contained | 15% | 8% | 26% | 12% | 15% | | | | | 10% | 27% | 11% | | New growth | 14% | 10% | 19% | 18% | 23% | | | | | 10% | 11% | 16% | | No growth | 40% | 14% | 39% | 47% | 38% | | | | | 58% | 51% | 48% | | Established less than 3 years/not yet trading | 17% | 62% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 6% | 0% | 6% | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | | | | | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Sustained | 10% | 7% | 11% | 10% | 27% | | | | | 7% | 29% | 8% | | Contained | 16% | 12% | 18% | 30% | 27% | | | | | 12% | 10% | 24% | | New growth | 9% | 5% | 15% | 20% | 0% | | | | | 8% | 5% | 4% | | No growth | 46% | 22% | 54% | 30% | 36% | | | | | 66% | 52% | 52% | | Established less than 3 years/not yet trading | 19% | 54% | 2% | 10% | 9% | | | | | 7% | 5% | 12% |

Both UKTI users and non-UKTI users predicted similar levels of growth over the next five years. Table 101: ASBS definition of growth by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Sustained | 13% | 5% | 11% | 17% | 25% | 12% | 20% | 19% | | Contained | 15% | 11% | 20% | 22% | 17% | 11% | 22% | 13% | | New growth | 12% | 6% | 20% | 17% | 17% | 11% | 4% | 13% | | No growth | 44% | 17% | 48% | 44% | 38% | 60% | 52% | 50% | | Established less than 3 years/not yet trading | 16% | 61% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 5% | 2% | 6% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Sustained | 10% | 8% | 13% | 22% | 23% | 7% | 8% | 0% | | Contained | 16% | 10% | 23% | 11% | 23% | 12% | 17% | 25% | | New growth | 11% | 9% | 12% | 22% | 15% | 2% | 25% | 17% | | No growth | 40% | 20% | 50% | 33% | 38% | 67% | 50% | 42% | | Established less than 3 years/not yet trading | 22% | 53% | 3% | 11% | 0% | 12% | 0% | 17% |

4.22 Growth OECD Definition

Additional analysis was conducted seeking to replicate the OECD categories of growth. Again, this analysis has replicated the approach as far as possible given the data available, with the details of the analysis provided in the panel below.

Table 102: Definition of Growth – OECD Definition

Companies have been defined as ‘high-growth’ if...

- Their employee numbers have grown by more than 75% over the last 3 years except firms established in the last 3 years (Q71)

Companies have been defined as ‘gazelles’ if...

- Their employee numbers have grown by more than 75% over the last 3 years except firms established in the last 3 years (Q71)
- And, they are less than 5 years old (Q12).

Only a minority of companies displayed ‘high growth’ under this definition.

The proportion of firms in the sample classified as ‘high growth’ or ‘gazelles’ was somewhat lower than found in the 2008 survey. In 2008, 13% of firms were classified as ‘high growth’ compared to just 6% in this survey.

As ‘gazelles’ are a subset of high growth firms, the proportion of companies defined as ‘gazelles’ was lower than high growth firms with 3% of firms being identified as gazelles in 2008 and only 1% in the current survey. This could be driven in part by the lower proportion of firms established for up to 5 years in the 2009 survey compared to the 2008 survey. A further key difference between the 2008 survey and the current survey is that 16% of firms up to 5 years of age were identified as high growth in the 2008 survey, but only 6% in the current survey. This is surprising given the higher proportion of young firms with over 100 employees in the 2009 survey sample which are suggestive of recent growth than found in the 2008 survey.

In both surveys, ‘gazelles’ were restricted to firms under 5 years of age so are not observed among older and larger firms.

Table 103: OECD definition of growth

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 37 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | High growth | 6% | 6% | 7% | 8% | | Gazelles | 1% | 6% | 0% | 0% |

Similarly small proportions of IP active and non-IP active companies displayed ‘high growth’ with levels rising for those IP active companies of between 6 and 10 years of age with 50 to 99 employee and non-IP active companies of between 6 and 10 years of age with more than 100 employees, although the bases for both are small and should be treated with caution.

Table 104: OECD definition of growth by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 26 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | High growth | 6% | 4% | 8% | 4% | | Gazelles | 1% | 4% | 0% | 0% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 11 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | High growth | 6% | 7% | 7% | 0% | | Gazelles | 2% | 7% | 0% | 0% |

Again for UKTI users and non-UKTI users there were similar small proportions of companies displaying ‘high growth’. Although PIMS data does not provide the same measure, PIMS 12-15 and 7-10 contained a higher proportion of firms which reported having grown substantially over the past five years, which was somewhat higher than reported by UKTI users in the survey sample. Table 105: OECD definition of growth by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | High growth | | 5% | 4% | 7% | 0% | 8% | 3% | 9% | 5% | | Gazelles | | 1% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | High growth | | 7% | 7% | 7% | 33% | 8% | 2% | 0% | 8% | | Gazelles | | 2% | 7% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

4.23 Business Planning

All companies were asked to indicate whether they had a current, written business plan. Those that had a current, written business plan were then asked to indicate whether this current business plan contained any targets relating to business in overseas markets.

Table 106 depicts whether companies have a current, written business plan by age of company. This table illustrates that older and larger companies are more likely to have a current, written business plan. Furthermore, the proportion of companies with a written business plan was lower in the 2008 survey, with just over six in ten (61%) with a written business plan, increasing to seven in ten companies with a written business plan in 2009 (70%). This may be due to the higher proportion of UKTI users in the 2009 survey sample.

Table 106: Existence of current, written business plans

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 5-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | | 70% | 69% | 64% | 81% | 89% | 57% | 81% | 93% | | No | | 27% | 30% | 34% | 15% | 11% | 38% | 14% | 4% | | Don’t know | | 2% | 1% | 1% | 4% | 0% | 3% | 5% | 4% | | Refused | | 1% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies. IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to have a current, written business plan. That said, whether companies were IP active or not, it was the case that the vast majority of larger companies have a current, written business plan. Table 107: Existence of current, written business plans by IP activity

| IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 5-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |-----------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | IP active | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | | 78% | 74% | 73% | 82% | 88% | 70% | 84% | 93% | | | | No | | 19% | 26% | 22% | 12% | 12% | 28% | 11% | 4% | | | | Don’t know| | 2% | 0% | 3% | 6% | 0% | 2% | 5% | 4% | | | | Refused | | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | | Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | | 61% | 65% | 58% | 80% | 91% | 44% | 76% | 92% | | | | No | | 36% | 33% | 41% | 20% | 9% | 48% | 19% | 4% | | | | Don’t know| | 2% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 5% | 4% | | | | Refused | | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 0% | | |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users in terms of whether they had a current, written business plan. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to have a current, written business plan. However again it should be noted that the vast majority of larger companies have a current, written business plan.

Table 108: Existence of current, written business plans by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | | 75% | 75% | 69% | 83% | 88% | 64% | 85% | 92% | | | | No | | 23% | 24% | 28% | 17% | 13% | 35% | 13% | 4% | | | | Don’t know | | 1% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 4% | | | | Refused | | 0% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | | 59% | 61% | 56% | 78% | 92% | 33% | 67% | 100% | | | | No | | 36% | 37% | 43% | 11% | 8% | 50% | 17% | 0% | | | | Don’t know | | 3% | 2% | 1% | 11% | 0% | 10% | 17% | 0% | | | | Refused | | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 7% | 0% | 0% | | |

The level of UKTI users with a written business plan in this current survey is consistent with the PIMS 12-15 and PIMS 7-10 user follow-up interviews of 2008 and 2009. Table 109: Comparison of existence of current, written business plans by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and PIMS 7-10 and PIMS Non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| UKTI users | Base | UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS Non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |------------|------|----------------|------------|---------------------|-----------------|---------------------|-----------------| | Yes | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3995 | 302 | 3143 | | No | | | | | | | | Don’t know | | | | | | | | Refused | | | | | | |

For just over half of these companies (54%) their current written business plans contained targets relating to business in overseas markets, which was more prevalent among larger companies.

Table 110: Existence of current, written business plans with targets relating to business overseas

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Yes | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | No | 14% | 19% | 14% | 15% | 8% | 15% | 5% | 8% | | Don’t know | 2% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 2% | 5% | | Refused | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | | No/ don’t know/refused/ No current written business plan | 30% | 31% | 36% | 19% | 11% | 43% | 19% | 7% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their likelihood of having a current, written business plan that contains targets relating to business in overseas markets. IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to have a current, written business plan that contained targets relating to business in overseas markets. Table 111: Existence of current, written business plans with targets relating to business overseas by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 5-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 67% | 61% | 60% | 76% | 77% | | No | 9% | 10% | 13% | 6% | 8% | | Don’t know| 2% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 4% | | No/ don’t know/refused/ No current written business plan | 22% | 26% | 27% | 18% | 12% |

| Non-IP active | Base | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---------------|------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 40% | 36% | 42% | 50% | | No | 19% | 27% | 15% | 30% | | Don’t know | 2% | 2% | 1% | 0% | | Refused | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | No/ don’t know/refused/ No current written business plan | 39% | 35% | 42% | 20% | 9% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding their likelihood of having a current, written business plan that contains targets relating to business in overseas markets. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to have a current, written business plan that contained targets relating to business in overseas markets.

Table 112: Existence of current, written business plans containing targets relating to business overseas by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 61% | 59% | 55% | 72% | | No | 12% | 13% | 13% | 11% | | Don’t know | 2% | 2% | 1% | 0% | | Refused | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | No/ don’t know/refused/ No current written business plan | 25% | 25% | 31% | 17% | 13% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 39% | 32% | 39% | 56% | | No | 19% | 28% | 17% | 22% | | Don’t know | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | | No/ don’t know/refused/ No current written business plan | 41% | 39% | 44% | 22% | 8% |

For UKTI users, the level of those with a current, written business plan that contained targets relating to business in overseas markets is consistent with the PIMS 12-15 and PIMS 7-10 and PIMS non-user interviews of 2008 and 2009. There is no data available which indicates the percentage of firms in the PIMS non-user survey 2008 and PIMS users 7-10 surveys which do not have overseas targets. Table 113: Comparison of business plans with targets by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 12-15 and PIMS 4-7 user follow-up interviews and PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009

| UKTI users | Base | UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS Non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |------------|------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|------------------| | | | | | | | | | | UKTI users | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Yes, contains overseas targets | 39% | 61% | 17% | 59% | 26% | 53% | | No overseas targets | 19% | 12% | 19% | 18% | 0% | 0% | | Don't know | 1% | 2% | 2% | 2% | 49% | 27% | | Not applicable | 41% | 25% | 62% | 21% | 49% | 27% |

Total

| UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS Non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|------------------| | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | 5. MODES OF INTERNATIONALISATION

All respondents were asked to indicate which of the following overseas business activities their firm had been involved in over the last 5 years. These included selling directly to businesses or individuals abroad, selling to businesses or individuals abroad through agents or distributors, licensing or franchising overseas, or other contractual arrangements (including joint ventures) and operating their own overseas site or office.

Companies not currently involved in any of these listed overseas activities were asked if they were seriously considering starting to conduct overseas business via any of these routes in the next year. In order to be included in this survey, respondents had to respond positively to this question. This group (the ‘considerers’) were asked which types of overseas business activities they were planning to become involved in.

This was a multi-code question and so respondents could offer more than one response.

Firms who indicated that they were involved in contractual arrangements were asked to specify the form used eg licensing, franchising etc.

Those companies who were involved in ‘other partnership or joint venture arrangements’ were asked to state what the main purpose of this partnership or joint venture was or will be.

Those firms who are currently conducting business overseas were asked to indicate whether they had imported any goods or services over the last 5 years (excluding through partnerships, joint ventures and production sites). Where required, a definition of importing was read out which was:

“By importing I mean the buying in of goods or services from overseas suppliers.”

All those who did import were asked to indicate whether they imported directly from an overseas supplier, or through a UK-based intermediary or both.

Those with overseas offices and sites were asked to indicate how many of these they had and their purpose.

As shown in the table below, the majority of companies were selling directly abroad (90%) or via agents and distributors (67%). The proportion of companies selling (ie selling direct and/or through agents or distributors) was 98% which was identical to the proportion in 2008.

Although the proportion of firms selling direct (90%) was similar to the 2008 survey (86%), there was a higher prevalence of the use of other modes of internationalisation in the 2009 survey. This may be driven in part by the higher proportion of manufacturing firms in the 2009 survey sample; results of the 2008 survey indicated that more firms in the production sector sold through agents and distributors than in the services sector (39% vs 26%). In the 2008 survey, firms in production were also more likely to import than firms in the services sector (64% vs 43%). In this 2009 survey, 67% of respondents indicated that they sold through agents and distributors compared to 30% in the 2008 survey.

Only 7% of firms reported using contractual arrangements in the 2008 survey but 15% reported doing so in this 2009 survey.

Overseas sites were also more prevalent: 27% of respondents operated these in 2009 but only 11% in the 2008 survey.

The level of importing was much higher in the 2009 survey than was identified in the 2008 survey (76% vs 48%).

Use of modes other than selling direct was most prevalent among firms with at least 100 employees which had been established for at least 5 years. However, firms with at least 50 employees (and had been established for at least 5 years) were more likely to have an overseas sales site than smaller firms while firms which had been established for at least 5 years were more likely to sell via agents or distributors than younger firms.

Franchising was the least commonly practiced form of contractual arrangement amongst the surveyed firms. Equal proportions of firms in the sample used licensing and other contractual arrangements.

Table 114: Mode of internationalisation

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Selling directly to businesses or individuals abroad | 90% | 87% | 88% | 93% | 89% | 92% | 91% | 94% | | Selling to businesses or individuals abroad through agents or distributors | 67% | 58% | 57% | 78% | 81% | 74% | 74% | 81% | | Licensing overseas | 8% | 5% | 7% | 4% | 16% | 5% | 16% | 17% | | Franchising overseas | 3% | 3% | 2% | 0% | 8% | 2% | 0% | 6% | | Other contractual arrangements (including joint ventures) | 8% | 6% | 7% | 4% | 19% | 7% | 9% | 18% | | Own overseas site or office : production | 6% | 6% | 5% | 4% | 14% | 3% | 3% | 13% | | Own overseas site or office : call centre | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Own overseas site or office : sales | 20% | 17% | 10% | 26% | 30% | 16% | 38% | 41% | | Own overseas site or office : R&D | 1% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 1% | | Importing | 76% | 69% | 76% | 81% | 78% | 77% | 90% | 81% |

For the purposes of further analysis, modes have been simplified into the groupings shown in the following table. Table 115: Simplified mode of internationalisation

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Direct sales | 90% | 87% | 88% | 93% | 89% | 92% | 91% | 94% | | Via agents/distributors | 67% | 58% | 57% | 78% | 81% | 74% | 74% | 81% | | Contractual arrangements (licensing, franchising and joint ventures) | 15% | 11% | 13% | 7% | 32% | 12% | 22% | 30% | | Overseas sites | 27% | 23% | 17% | 30% | 46% | 20% | 43% | 57% | | Importing | 76% | 69% | 76% | 81% | 78% | 77% | 90% | 81% |

IP active companies are more likely than non-IP active companies to use non-traditional modes of internationalisation ie modes other than selling direct. IP active firms were almost twice as likely as non-IP active firms to be engaged in contractual arrangements (21% vs 9%) and to have overseas sites (36% vs 18%). A slightly higher percentage of IP active firms import (80%) than non-IP active firms (72%). These results show a broadly similar pattern to those found in the 2008 survey.

Table 116: Simplified mode of internationalisation by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Direct sales | 89% | 86% | 89% | 94% | 85% | 92% | 89% | 93% | | Via agents/distributors | 81% | 78% | 74% | 88% | 85% | 82% | 81% | 88% | | Contractual arrangements (licensing, franchising and joint ventures) | 21% | 19% | 20% | 6% | 31% | 14% | 27% | 33% | | Overseas sites | 36% | 27% | 26% | 41% | 54% | 26% | 46% | 61% | | Importing | 80% | 76% | 77% | 82% | 77% | 76% | 95% | 86% |

Non-IP active

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Direct sales | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Via agents/distributors | 52% | 42% | 48% | 60% | 73% | 66% | 62% | 56% | | Contractual arrangements (licensing, franchising and joint ventures) | 9% | 4% | 9% | 10% | 36% | 9% | 14% | 20% | | Overseas sites | 18% | 19% | 13% | 10% | 27% | 14% | 38% | 44% | | Importing | 72% | 64% | 76% | 80% | 82% | 77% | 81% | 64% |

UKTI users and non-UKTI users were equally likely to use different modes of internationalisation, with the exception of selling via agents and distributors which was more likely to be used by UKTI users. Table 117: Simplified mode of internationalisation by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | | | | | | | | | | Direct sales | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Via agents/distributors | 91% | 93% | 90% | 89% | 92% | 91% | 89% | 95% | | | 72% | 67% | 62% | 78% | 79% | 75% | 74% | 82% | | Contractual arrangements (licensing, franchising and joint ventures) | 16% | 13% | 12% | 6% | 25% | 12% | 22% | 29% | | Overseas sites | 28% | 24% | 15% | 33% | 38% | 19% | 43% | 57% | | Importing | 78% | 72% | 77% | 83% | 92% | 77% | 89% | 79% | | Non-UKTI users | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Direct sales | 87% | 80% | 86% | 100% | 85% | 98% | 100% | 92% | | Via agents/distributors | 56% | 46% | 50% | 78% | 85% | 69% | 75% | 67% | | Contractual arrangements (licensing, franchising and joint ventures) | 14% | 8% | 15% | 11% | 46% | 10% | 25% | 33% | | Overseas sites | 26% | 22% | 21% | 22% | 62% | 21% | 42% | 58% | | Importing | 72% | 65% | 75% | 78% | 54% | 76% | 92% | 92% |

Only companies either with overseas sites or who where planning to have overseas sites within the next 12 months were asked to indicate how many overseas sites they either had or would have.

The number of overseas offices or sites is summarised in the following table which illustrates that, as in the 2008 survey, the majority of firms with overseas sites have up to 5 sites. However, the 2009 survey sample contained a higher proportion of firms with 21-50 sites (8% of firms with overseas sites compared with 2% in the 2008 survey) but fewer with 6-10 sites (6% vs 11% in 2008). This may be related to firms in the 2009 sample being active in more markets than firms in the 2008 sample.

Table 118: Number of overseas offices or sites

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 248 | 54 | 43 | 8 | 17 | 39 | 25 | 62 | | One | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | 2-5 | 36% | 31% | 51% | 38% | 6% | 54% | 28% | 29% | | 6-10 | 40% | 35% | 44% | 25% | 35% | 41% | 64% | 34% | | 11-20 | 6% | 11% | 2% | 0% | 12% | 0% | 8% | 8% | | 21-50 | 5% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 18% | 3% | 0% | 10% | | More than 50 | 8% | 7% | 2% | 38% | 24% | 3% | 0% | 13% | | Don’t know | 3% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 6% |

The following table summarises the main purpose of these overseas offices or sites with nearly six in ten (56%) classified as distribution/sales offices and one in five (20%) classified as manufacturing. Whilst the proportion of offices/sites for manufacturing is similar to that of the 2008 survey (22%), the proportion of distribution/sales offices is higher in the 2009 survey sample (56%) than in the 2008 sample (38%). In the 2008 sample, there were 2 call centres; the 2009 survey sample contained none. Table 119: Main purpose of the overseas office and sites for all overseas business activities

| Purpose | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------------------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 248 | 54 | 43 | 8 | 17 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Manufacturing | 20% | 22% | 26% | 13% | 29% | | | | | 13% | 8% | 21% | | Assembly | 2% | 2% | 5% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 0% | 2% | | Distribution/sales office | 56% | 59% | 47% | 50% | 41% | | | | | 67% | 72% | 50% | | After-sales office | 4% | 2% | 2% | 25% | 0% | | | | | 8% | 0% | 6% | | Service delivery | 13% | 11% | 12% | 13% | 24% | | | | | 5% | 16% | 15% | | Research, product or process development | 2% | 2% | 7% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 4% | 2% | | Don’t know | 4% | 2% | 2% | 0% | 6% | | | | | 8% | 0% | 5% |

5.1 Number of Modes

In terms of the number of modes that companies utilised, most typically this was one (33%) or two (41%). Larger and older companies were more likely to adopt more modes for conducting international business.

Table 120: Number of modes

| Modes | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | | | | | 37 | 196 | 58 | | | | | 108 | | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | One | 33% | 44% | 43% | 22% | 16% | | | | | 28% | 17% | 13% | | Two | 41% | 37% | 42% | 52% | 38% | | | | | 50% | 43% | 28% | | Three | 19% | 14% | 12% | 22% | 27% | | | | | 17% | 31% | 41% | | Four or more | 7% | 5% | 4% | 4% | 19% | | | | | 5% | 9% | 19% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding the number of modes they utilise for conducting international business. Non-IP active companies were more likely than IP active companies to adopt a single mode for selling internationally with around half (47%) of non-IP active firms using only one mode compared to around one fifth (19%) of IP active firms. Over a third (37%) of IP active firms used at least three modes of internationalisation, but only about one in seven (15%) non-IP active firms used as many modes. Table 121: Number of modes by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | Base | | | | | | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | One mode | 19% | 28% | 23% | 6% | 15% | | | | | 20% | 11% | 10% | | Two modes | 44% | 44% | 50% | 65% | 35% | | | | | 54% | 43% | 24% | | Three modes | 26% | 19% | 21% | 24% | 31% | | | | | 19% | 38% | 45% | | Four or more modes | 11% | 9% | 6% | 6% | 19% | | | | | 8% | 8% | 22% | | Non-IP active | Base | | | | | | | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | | | | | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | One mode | 47% | 58% | 53% | 50% | 18% | | | | | 36% | 29% | 24% | | Two modes | 38% | 31% | 37% | 30% | 45% | | | | | 46% | 43% | 40% | | Three modes | 12% | 10% | 7% | 20% | 18% | | | | | 15% | 19% | 28% | | Four or more modes | 3% | 1% | 3% | 0% | 18% | | | | | 2% | 10% | 8% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding the number of modes they utilise for conducting international business. Non-UKTI users were more likely than UKTI users to adopt a single mode for international trade (45% vs 28%).

Table 122: Number of modes by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | | | | | | | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | | | | | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | One mode | 28% | 33% | 37% | 28% | 21% | | | | | 27% | 15% | 13% | | Two modes | 44% | 44% | 49% | 44% | 42% | | | | | 51% | 48% | 28% | | Three modes | 21% | 17% | 11% | 22% | 21% | | | | | 18% | 30% | 41% | | Four or more modes | 7% | 6% | 3% | 6% | 17% | | | | | 5% | 7% | 19% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | | | | | | | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | | | | | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | One mode | 45% | 59% | 50% | 11% | 8% | | | | | 31% | 25% | 17% | | Two modes | 33% | 28% | 32% | 67% | 31% | | | | | 48% | 25% | 25% | | Three modes | 16% | 10% | 13% | 22% | 38% | | | | | 14% | 33% | 42% | | Four or more modes | 6% | 3% | 5% | 0% | 23% | | | | | 7% | 17% | 17% | 6. DRIVERS OF GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS

All companies were asked to nominate ‘the most challenging country’ in which they had done business and to focus their attention on one mode in that market for the sections of the interview relating to drivers of market and barriers. In those instances where the respondent was not able to identify a single, ‘challenging’ market the interviewer proceeded to ask them to focus on the one they had started doing business in most recently.

With specific reference to the respondent’s selected challenging market, interviewers read out the following statement:

“I’m going to read out some of the individual circumstances that other firms have found themselves in when looking at doing business in specific overseas locations and I’d like you to tell me the extent to which each one applied to you when you were FIRST CONSIDERING doing business <in country>.”

All companies were read out a list of five statements, which were randomised to prevent order bias, and asked to rate each one on a 5-point scale where 1 meant ‘not at all applicable’ and 5 meant ‘completely applicable’. The following table is a summary of those who said either ‘applicable’ or ‘completely applicable’ to these statements (i.e. gave a score of 4 or 5).

Responses were similar to those of the 2008 survey sample with the highest proportion of companies indicating that they had received an approach from someone in the market, or had identified internally that the country offered a potential opportunity.

Firms which had been established for at least 6 years and had over 50 employees were more likely to indicate that they had identified internally that a market offered an opportunity than to have received an approach. This suggests that as firms become more experienced (older firms were more likely to have had more export experience in terms of the number of years exporting) they become more pro-active and less reactive when selecting a market.

In this table and the two subsequent tables on ‘drivers of market’ the ‘none applicable’ refers to those companies that did not give either an ‘applicable’ or a ‘completely applicable’ rating to any of these five statements on drivers of market.

| Table 123: Drivers of market | |-----------------------------| | % scoring 4 or 5 | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Received an approach | 55% | 57% | 56% | 56% | 54% | 59% | 52% | 42% | | Suggested by someone external to the company | 23% | 23% | 26% | 26% | 24% | 21% | 19% | 21% | | Someone within the company who already had experience | 26% | 32% | 25% | 33% | 24% | 20% | 14% | 31% | | Considering a number of countries | 19% | 17% | 19% | 37% | 14% | 18% | 22% | 20% | | Identified internally as potential opportunity | 52% | 48% | 52% | 59% | 57% | 48% | 57% | 58% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 13% | 14% | 11% | 4% | 8% | 14% | 14% | 16% | IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to have identified internally that the selected country had offered a potential opportunity. They were also more likely to have considered a number of markets at the time and to have decided to focus on the market in question. This suggests that IP active firms are more strategic when selecting a market than non-IP active firms.

Table 124: Drivers of market by IP activity

| % scoring 4 or 5 | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | IP active | | | | | | | | | | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Received an approach | 50% | 55% | 53% | 41% | 46% | 56% | 49% | 39% | | Suggested by someone external to the company | 25% | 26% | 26% | 35% | 27% | 24% | 22% | 23% | | Someone within the company who already had experience | 26% | 34% | 20% | 35% | 27% | 20% | 16% | 31% | | Considering a number of countries | 23% | 24% | 26% | 35% | 12% | 19% | 30% | 24% | | Identified internally as potential opportunity | 58% | 57% | 61% | 82% | 58% | 48% | 59% | 61% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 12% | 10% | 11% | 6% | 8% | 14% | 14% | 13% | | Non-IP active | | | | | | | | | | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Received an approach | 59% | 59% | 58% | 80% | 73% | 62% | 57% | 52% | | Suggested by someone external to the company | 21% | 21% | 26% | 10% | 18% | 18% | 14% | 16% | | Someone within the company who already had experience | 26% | 30% | 28% | 30% | 18% | 20% | 10% | 28% | | Considering a number of countries | 14% | 11% | 15% | 40% | 18% | 17% | 10% | 8% | | Identified internally as potential opportunity | 45% | 40% | 47% | 20% | 55% | 47% | 52% | 48% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 14% | 16% | 11% | 0% | 9% | 14% | 14% | 24% |

UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to have identified internally that the selected country had offered a potential opportunity (55% vs 44%). They were also more likely to have considered a number of markets at the time and to have decided to focus on the market in question (23% vs 10%). This suggests that like IP-active firms, users of UKTI services are more likely to have been strategic when selecting a market. Table 125: Drivers of market by UKTI usage

| % scoring 4 or 5 | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UKTI users | | | | | | | | | | | Received an approach | 56% | 59% | 55% | 61% | 54% | 59% | 59% | 45% | | | Suggested by someone external to the company | 23% | 24% | 26% | 22% | 29% | 21% | 20% | 22% | | | Someone within the company who already had experience | 27% | 34% | 27% | 33% | 29% | 21% | 17% | 32% | | | Considering a number of countries | 23% | 23% | 25% | 44% | 13% | 19% | 26% | 23% | | | Identified internally as potential opportunity | 55% | 54% | 53% | 67% | 67% | 51% | 59% | 57% | | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 10% | 9% | 9% | 0% | 4% | 13% | 9% | 16% | | | Non-UKTI users | | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Received an approach | 53% | 55% | 58% | 44% | 54% | 57% | 25% | 17% | | | Suggested by someone external to the company | 23% | 23% | 25% | 33% | 15% | 21% | 17% | 17% | | | Someone within the company who already had experience | 23% | 29% | 23% | 33% | 15% | 17% | 0% | 17% | | | Considering a number of countries | 10% | 9% | 10% | 22% | 15% | 12% | 8% | 0% | | | Identified internally as potential opportunity | 44% | 40% | 50% | 44% | 38% | 36% | 50% | 67% | | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 18% | 20% | 14% | 11% | 15% | 19% | 33% | 17% | |

These drivers were summarised into three categories: serendipity and networks; independent analysis and solely reactive. The definitions of these are set out in the table below.

Table 126: Definition of networks and serendipity, independent analysis and solely reactive

Companies have been defined as being motivated to a significant extent by ‘networks & serendipity’ if they scored 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale for...

- Received an approach from someone in the market
- Or, it had been suggested to them by an external source that the market might offer them an opportunity
- Or, Someone in the company already had connections in that market

Firms have been defined as being motivated to a significant extent by ‘independent analysis’ if they scored 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale for...

- Had been considering a number of markets and decided to focus on this one
- Or, Identified internally that the market offered a potential opportunity for them

Firms have been defined as ‘solely reactive’ if...

- They score 4 or 5 for ‘received an approach from someone in the market’
- But did not score 3, 4 or 5 for having connections, considering a number of markets or internal identification of an opportunity. Nearly three quarters (74%) of companies indicated that ‘networks and serendipity’ played a vital role which strongly indicates the prominent role played by existing contacts and the element of chance when companies conduct business overseas. Overall these results are very comparable to the 2008 survey, although the proportion of sample firms agreeing that ‘networks and serendipity’ was a driver of geographical focus is slightly lower than the 81% in the 2008 survey sample.

Table 127: Summary of drivers of market

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Networks and serendipity | 74% | 77% | 77% | 81% | 76% | 74% | 66% | 65% | | Independent analysis | 55% | 51% | 55% | 67% | 59% | 50% | 60% | 62% | | Solely reactive | 13% | 14% | 13% | 15% | 5% | 18% | 10% | 5% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 13% | 14% | 11% | 4% | 8% | 14% | 14% | 16% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies with regards to each of these drivers of market. Independent analysis is more prevalent among IP active companies than non-IP active companies (61% vs 49%). IP active firms were also less likely to be solely reactive than non-IP active firms (9% and 17% respectively). This suggests that IP active companies are more considered than non-IP active firms when selecting an overseas market.

Table 128: Summary of drivers of market by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Networks and serendipity | 72% | 77% | 72% | 71% | 73% | 74% | 68% | 65% | | Independent analysis | 61% | 59% | 64% | 82% | 58% | 52% | 62% | 65% | | Solely reactive | 9% | 13% | 8% | 0% | 4% | 14% | 11% | 4% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 12% | 10% | 11% | 6% | 8% | 14% | 14% | 13% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Networks and serendipity | 76% | 77% | 80% | 100% | 82% | 74% | 62% | 64% | | Independent analysis | 49% | 44% | 50% | 40% | 64% | 48% | 57% | 52% | | Solely reactive | 17% | 15% | 16% | 40% | 9% | 22% | 10% | 8% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 14% | 16% | 11% | 0% | 9% | 14% | 14% | 24% |

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users with regards to ‘networks and serendipity’ and independent analysis. Independent analysis is much more prevalent among UKTI users than non-UKTI users (59% vs 46%). UKTI users are only slightly less likely to be solely reactive than non-UKTI users (11% and 17% respectively). These findings are broadly consistent with results from PIMS users and non-user survey although these surveys also find that PIMS users are less likely than non-users to report ‘networks and serendipity’ as drivers of market choice. The difference between the two groups is less marked in this 2009 survey. Table 129: Summary of drivers of market by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Networks and serendipity | 76% | 81% | 77% | 83% | 79% | 75% | 72% | 69% | | Independent analysis | 59% | 57% | 59% | 78% | 67% | 53% | 63% | 61% | | Solely reactive | 11% | 13% | 9% | 11% | 4% | 16% | 11% | 5% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 10% | 9% | 9% | 0% | 4% | 13% | 9% | 16% |

| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Networks and serendipity | 70% | 70% | 77% | 78% | 69% | 71% | 42% | 33% | | Independent analysis | 46% | 43% | 50% | 44% | 46% | 38% | 50% | 67% | | Solely reactive | 17% | 15% | 19% | 22% | 8% | 26% | 8% | 0% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 18% | 20% | 14% | 11% | 15% | 19% | 33% | 17% |

The following table depicts the comparable data from the 2008 PIMS non-user survey and PIMS 7-10.

Table 130: Comparison of drivers of market choice by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 7-10 and the 2008 and 2009 PIMS Non-user surveys

| | Total | UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 12-15 | PIMS Non-users 2008 | Users PIMS 7-10 | |----------------------|-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|------------------| | UKTI users | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 3985 | 302 | 3143 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Networks and serendipity | 76% | 70% | 0% | 0% | 50% | 63% | | Independent analysis | 59% | 46% | 0% | 0% | 32% | 63% | | Solely reactive | 11% | 17% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 10% | 18% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

6.1 Market Perceptions

Firms were also asked a series of questions about their perceptions of their chosen market in respect to a number of characteristics (covering the ease of doing business there, perceptions on levels of demand/costs and levels of risk). Respondents were asked to rate on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 meant ‘very easy’ and 5 meant ‘very difficult’, how easy or difficult it has been or that they expected it to be to do business in the nominated country. Some of the statements were relevant only to certain modes of internationalisation and were only read to firms which had reported using the relevant mode eg ease of finding a suitable partner was only relevant to those where the mode involved some form of partnership. Thus, the bases here reflect those for whom the mode was relevant. Again all statements were randomised to prevent order bias.

The scale used differs slightly from that used in the 2008 survey in that a semantic, rather than numeric scale was used in 2008. In 2008, respondents were asked to indicate whether the issue in question had been very easy, fairly easy, average, fairly hard or very hard. As indicated above, the current survey used a numeric scale. The majority of companies found each of these aspects of conducting business overseas to be either ‘fairly easy’ or ‘very easy’. For the majority of companies, understanding the financial risk (75%) in the selected country posed a low risk.

Table 131: Summary of drivers of market

| % Not scoring 4 or 5 | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Ease of finding customers | 64% | 67% | 64% | 63% | 76% | 64% | 50% | 63% | | Base | 332 | 77 | 79 | 13 | 12 | 79 | 24 | 48 | | Ease of finding suitable partner | 54% | 56% | 57% | 46% | 42% | 51% | 42% | 60% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Ease of negotiating the legal and regulatory framework or standards | 54% | 57% | 61% | 48% | 46% | 50% | 52% | 47% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Ease of negotiating the culture and language | 71% | 75% | 75% | 85% | 73% | 66% | 71% | 63% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Ease of IP protection | 57% | 61% | 55% | 70% | 65% | 53% | 52% | 56% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Ease of logistics of doing business | 65% | 71% | 69% | 52% | 59% | 61% | 62% | 54% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Risk: getting paid and enforcing contracts | 69% | 70% | 72% | 67% | 68% | 68% | 76% | 60% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Risk: ability to make a profit | 75% | 78% | 76% | 78% | 76% | 74% | 71% | 67% | | Base | 384 | 89 | 104 | 11 | 12 | 77 | 29 | 62 | | Making any modifications to your products or services so that they are suitable for customers | 78% | 80% | 74% | 91% | 92% | 79% | 66% | 79% | | Base | 38 | 11 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 9 | | Ease of recruiting and retaining suitable staff | 66% | 91% | 67% | 0% | 33% | 75% | 40% | 56% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 2% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 5% | 3% |

IP active companies and non-IP active companies were most likely to state that understanding the financial risk was regarded as a low risk.

______________________________________________________________________

19 This base is 384 respondents as it relates to those who had indicated that they expected to need to modify their products or service for customers.

20 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results. Table 132: Summary of drivers of market by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Ease of finding customers | 65% | 68% | 64% | 65% | 73% | 63% | 57% | 65% | | Base | 214 | 49 | 35 | 11 | 10 | 50 | 17 | 42 | | Ease of finding a suitable partner | 49% | 45% | 46% | 45% | 50% | 46% | 47% | 60% | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Ease of negotiating the legal and regulatory framework or standards | 54% | 53% | 64% | 47% | 38% | 56% | 54% | 47% | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Ease of negotiating the culture and language | 69% | 69% | 74% | 88% | 69% | 64% | 76% | 61% | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Ease of IP protection | 60% | 64% | 58% | 71% | 58% | 62% | 59% | 55% | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Ease of logistics of doing business | 61% | 66% | 69% | 47% | 62% | 61% | 54% | 53% | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Risk: getting paid and enforcing contracts | 68% | 72% | 66% | 59% | 69% | 70% | 78% | 58% | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Risk: Ability to make a profit | 75% | 77% | 74% | 88% | 73% | 80% | 68% | 66% | | Base | 220 | 45 | 44 | 8 | 10 | 45 | 22 | 46 | | Making any modifications to your products or services so that they are suitable for customers | 76% | 78% | 68% | 88% | 90% | 78% | 64% | 80% | | Base | 17 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 7 | | Ease of recruiting and retaining suitable staff | 47% | 67% | 0% | 0% | 33% | 0% | 33% | 57% | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 2% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 3% | 2% | | Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 25 | 25 | |--------------|------|-----|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----| | | | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 25 | 25 | | Ease of finding customers | 63% | 65% | 64% | 60% | 82% | 66% | 38% | 56% | | Base | 118 | 28 | 44 | 2 | 2 | 29 | 7 | 6 | | Ease of finding a suitable partner | 63% | 75% | 66% | 50% | 0% | 59% | 29% | 67% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Ease of negotiating the legal and regulatory framework or standards | 55% | 60% | 59% | 50% | 64% | 44% | 48% | 48% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Ease of negotiating the culture and language | 74% | 79% | 75% | 80% | 82% | 69% | 62% | 68% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Ease of IP protection | 53% | 58% | 53% | 70% | 82% | 44% | 38% | 56% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Ease of logistics of doing business | 68% | 75% | 69% | 60% | 55% | 62% | 76% | 56% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Risk: getting paid and enforcing contracts | 71% | 69% | 75% | 80% | 64% | 67% | 71% | 68% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Risk: Ability to make a profit | 75% | 80% | 77% | 60% | 82% | 69% | 76% | 68% | | Base | 164 | 44 | 60 | 3 | 2 | 32 | 7 | 16 | | Making any modifications to your products or services so that they are suitable for customers | 80% | 82% | 78% | 100%| 100%| 81% | 71% | 75% | | Base | 21 | 8 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 2 | | Ease of recruiting and retaining suitable staff | 81% | 100%| 67% | 0% | 0% | 100%| 50% | 50% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 3% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 5% | 10%| 4% |

Again UKTI users and non-UKTI users were most likely to state that understanding the financial risk was a low risk associated with conducting business abroad. Table 133: Summary of drivers of market by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Ease of finding customers | 64% | 69% | 64% | 61% | 75% | 66% | 48% | 61% | | Base | 242 | 46 | 51 | 11 | 8 | 65 | 19 | 42 | | Ease of finding a suitable partner | 49% | 46% | 49% | 45% | 38% | 49% | 42% | 57% | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Ease of negotiating the legal and regulatory framework or standards | 52% | 54% | 55% | 56% | 50% | 48% | 52% | 49% | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Ease of negotiating the culture and language | 70% | 73% | 71% | 89% | 79% | 63% | 72% | 66% | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Ease of IP protection | 57% | 61% | 52% | 61% | 75% | 55% | 59% | 58% | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Ease of logistics of doing business | 62% | 69% | 66% | 50% | 58% | 60% | 61% | 52% | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Risk: Getting paid and enforcing contracts | 69% | 73% | 74% | 61% | 67% | 67% | 78% | 58% | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Risk: Ability to make a profit | 75% | 76% | 80% | 78% | 75% | 73% | 74% | 66% | | Base | 274 | 58 | 63 | 7 | 6 | 61 | 23 | 56 | | Making any modifications to your products or services so that they are suitable for customers | 80% | 84% | 78% | 86% | 100% | 80% | 61% | 80% | | Base | 23 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 7 | | Recruiting and retaining suitable staff | 61% | 100% | 67% | 0% | 0% | 75% | 50% | 43% | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 2% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 5% | 4% | 2% | 6.2 Market Perceptions: Summary

The eight elements of conducting overseas business have been summarised into the following five market perceptions.

Table 134: Market perceptions summary

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | |----------------|------|-----|-----|-----|---|----|----|----|----| | | | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Ease of finding customers | 64% | 63% | 64% | 67% | 77% | 57% | 58% | 75% | | Base | 90 | 31 | 28 | 2 | 4 | 14 | 5 | 6 | | Ease of finding a suitable partner | 67% | 71% | 71% | 50% | 50% | 57% | 40% | 5% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Ease of negotiating the legal and regulatory framework or standards | 60% | 60% | 69% | 33% | 38% | 57% | 50% | 33% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Ease of negotiating the culture and language | 76% | 76% | 80% | 78% | 62% | 79% | 67% | 42% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Ease of IP protection | 56% | 59% | 59% | 89% | 46% | 48% | 25% | 33% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Ease of logistics of doing business | 71% | 74% | 73% | 56% | 62% | 64% | 67% | 67% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Risk: Getting paid and enforcing contracts | 69% | 66% | 69% | 78% | 69% | 74% | 67% | 75% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Risk: Ability to make a profit | 75% | 81% | 69% | 78% | 77% | 79% | 58% | 75% | | Base | 110 | 31 | 41 | 4 | 6 | 16 | 6 | 6 | | Making any modifications to your products or services so that they are suitable for customers | 73% | 71% | 68% | 100% | 83% | 75% | 83% | 67% | | Base | 15 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | | Recruiting and retaining suitable staff | 73% | 86% | 67% | 0% | 50% | 0% | 0% | 100% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 8% | 8% |

Companies have been defined as perceiving the market favourably with respect to ‘contacts’ if they do not score 4 (fairly hard) or 5 (very hard) on a 5-point scale for...

- Ease of finding customers
- And, the ease of finding a suitable partner

Firms have been defined as perceiving the market favourably with respect to ‘practicalities’ if they do not score 4 (fairly hard) or 5 (very hard) on a 5-point scale for...

- Ease of negotiating the legal & regulatory framework or standards

- And, the ease of dealing with the logistics of doing business

- And, the ease of making product/service modifications (including those making no product/service modifications) Firms have been defined as perceiving the market favourably with respect to ‘language & culture’ if they do not score 4 (fairly hard) or 5 (very hard) on a 5-point scale for…

- Ease of negotiating the culture and language

Firms have been defined as perceiving the market favourably with respect to ‘risk & IP’ if they do not score 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale for …

- Ease of protecting your Intellectual Property (not 4 (fairly hard) or 5 (very hard))
- And, risk of ensuring you get paid and enforcing contracts (not 4 (fairly high risk) or 5 (very high risk))
- And, the financial risk in terms of ensuring a return on investment (not 4 (fairly high risk) or 5 (very high risk))

Firms have been defined as perceiving the market favourably with respect to ‘resources’ if they scored as follows…

- Ease of recruiting and retaining suitable staff (not 4 (fairly hard) or 5 (very hard)).

It is apparent from the following table that, as in 2008, ‘language and culture’ plays a key role in international business and that it can be an especially pertinent consideration for younger companies. In the following three tables the ‘Not Applicable’ category refers to those who have not selected a score of 1-3 (ie very easy – average) to any of the questions relating to conducting business overseas. Furthermore, for each of these tables the bases refer to the number of respondents who were asked the question, that is based on routing, rather than the overall sample.

**Table 135: Market perceptions summary**

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Contacts | 911 | 13% | 12% | 14% | 11% | 11% | 15% | 7% | 18% | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Practicalities | 911 | 14% | 13% | 17% | 7% | 14% | 13% | 14% | 14% | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Language and culture | 911 | 71% | 75% | 75% | 85% | 73% | 66% | 71% | 63% | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Risk and IP | 911 | 36% | 40% | 39% | 44% | 38% | 30% | 36% | 29% | | Base21 | 38 | 11% | 6% | 0% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 9% | | Resources | 911 | 66% | 91% | 67% | 0% | 33% | 75% | 40% | 56% | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 911 | 16% | 14% | 14% | 7% | 11% | 19% | 16% | 25% |

21 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results. Whilst issues of ‘language and culture’ were important for both IP active and non-IP active companies, it was more an issue for non-IP active companies.

Table 136: Market perceptions summary by IP activity

| % scoring 4 or 5 | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | IP active | | | | | | | | | | | Base | 100% | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Contacts | 16% | 14% | 17% | 18% | 15% | 18% | 5% | 18% | 18% | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | Practicalities | 14% | 13% | 19% | 6% | 12% | 16% | 11% | 13% | | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | Language and culture | 69% | 69% | 74% | 88% | 69% | 64% | 76% | 61% | | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | Risk and IP | 35% | 36% | 37% | 41% | 38% | 37% | 38% | 29% | | | Base22 | 17 | 3 | 0% | 0% | 3 | 1 | 3 | 7 | | | Resources | 47% | 67% | 0% | 0% | 33% | - | 33% | 57% | | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 18% | 17% | 14% | 6% | 15% | 21% | 14% | 24% | |

| | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Non-IP active | | | | | | | | | | | Base | 100% | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Contacts | 11% | 10% | 12% | 0% | 0% | 12% | 10% | 16% | | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | Practicalities | 14% | 13% | 16% | 10% | 18% | 9% | 19% | 16% | | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | Language and culture | 74% | 79% | 75% | 80% | 82% | 69% | 62% | 68% | | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | Risk and IP | 37% | 44% | 40% | 50% | 36% | 23% | 33% | 28% | | | Base23 | 21 | 8 | 6 | 0% | 0% | 3 | 2 | 2 | | | Resources | 81% | 100%| 67% | 0% | 0% | 100%| 100%| 100%| | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 15% | 12% | 14% | 10% | 0% | 18% | 19% | 28% | |

Similarly, whilst issues of ‘language and culture’ were important for both UKTI users and non-UKTI users, it was more an issue for non-UKTI users.

______________________________________________________________________

22 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results.

23 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results. Table 137: Market perceptions summary by UKTI usage

| % scoring 4 or 5 | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|---------|-------|--------|---------|-------| | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Contacts | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Practicalities | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Language and culture | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Risk and IP | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Resources | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Contacts | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Practicalities | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Language and culture | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Risk and IP | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Resources | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | | Not significantly driven by any of these factors | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |

Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results.

Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results. 7. BARRIERS

All respondents were asked to think not about their own company but about the difficulties or problems that a firm in a similar position to themselves in terms of size, sector and structure might face doing business in the nominated country. They were then read out a list of possible issues and asked to indicate the extent to which a firm similar to themselves would encounter each one when trying to do business in the nominated country. This type of projective questioning was employed following difficulties encountered in previous studies in measuring barriers through direct questioning techniques. Employing a projective technique attempts to circumvent the reluctance of firms to acknowledge barriers by asking them to talk about issues that other firms ‘in a similar position’ to them might face.

All companies were asked to provide a score in the range of 1 to 5 for the extent to which they felt that specific issues were likely to be a difficulty, where 1 meant that it would 'not be a problem at all' and 5 meant it would be 'extremely difficult'. The statements were rotated to avoid bias with some, however, still placed in the same order.

A series of 11 potential barriers were tested with this questioning approach. The following table summarises proportions scoring either a 4 or a 5 on the 5-point scale for each of these elements, that is, those who said ‘difficult’ or ‘extremely difficult’. The responses to these questions are referred to in the analysis as projected barriers, due to the projective questioning technique used.

Again these questions were only put to companies for whom they were relevant. For example, the question about ‘problems obtaining work permits or visas for staff to allow them to relocate to <market>’ was only asked of those with an overseas site or office. Hence, the base for this element of the question is only the subgroup that has a site or office overseas.

The analysis illustrates that the greatest barrier to conducting business overseas is ‘identifying who to make contact with in the first instance [or finding a suitable partner]’, with nearly half of all companies (45%) identifying this as being problematic. These findings are in line with the 2008 survey. Indeed the largest discrepancy between the two surveys was for ‘identifying who to make contact with in the first instance [or finding a suitable partner]’ which in 2008 had fewer companies stating that this was ‘difficult’ or ‘very difficult’ (34%) compared to the 2009 survey. Table 138: Barriers to conducting overseas business

| % scoring 4 or 5 | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Obtaining basic information | 21% | 18% | 22% | 22% | 27% | 9% | 21% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Identifying who to make contact with | 45% | 39% | 45% | 56% | 38% | 49% | 52% | 49% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Establishing an initial dialogue | 33% | 29% | 34% | 37% | 36% | 34% | 38% | 33% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Building relationships | 37% | 36% | 36% | 44% | 49% | 34% | 36% | 42% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Cultural differences outside of any language barriers | 23% | 25% | 22% | 22% | 27% | 22% | 17% | 28% | | Base | 863 | 222 | 240 | 27 | 34 | 191 | 52 | 97 | | Not having an office or site | 33% | 31% | 32% | 41% | 44% | 34% | 31% | 37% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Home bias | 28% | 25% | 29% | 41% | 22% | 23% | 40% | 32% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | The costs associated with doing business | 32% | 28% | 32% | 41% | 35% | 31% | 36% | 39% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Finding the necessary management time | 36% | 35% | 35% | 41% | 35% | 36% | 36% | 41% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Exchange rates and currency | 33% | 28% | 34% | 41% | 35% | 32% | 36% | 42% | | Base | 38 | 11 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 9 | | Problems obtaining work permits or visas | 16% | 18% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 25% | 20% | 22% | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | None of these barriers significant | 14% | 19% | 14% | 11% | 8% | 13% | 10% | 10% |

26 The percentage of summary of drivers of market identified in Table 131 to Table 133 and the barriers to conducting overseas business identified in Table 138 to Table 140 do not total to 100% due to a respondents stating ‘don’t know’ and ‘not applicable’ in response to these questions.

27 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results. Perceptions of the market (defined as being fairly difficult and very difficult)

| Perceptions of the market | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | |---------------------------|------|-----|-----|-----|----|----|-----|----|-----| | Ease of negotiating framework | 36% | 34% | 28% | 41% | 54% | 39% | 38% | 44% | | Ease of negotiating language and culture | 26% | 23% | 22% | 15% | 27% | 30% | 29% | 32% | | Ease of protecting Intellectual Property | 22% | 19% | 16% | 15% | 24% | 24% | 28% | 31% | | Ease of logistics of doing business | 33% | 27% | 30% | 48% | 41% | 36% | 36% | 43% | | Ease of recruiting and retaining suitable staff | 29% | 9% | 33% | 0% | 67% | 25% | 60% | 22% | | Ease of making modifications to your products or services | 19% | 18% | 19% | 9% | 8% | 19% | 34% | 16% | | Ease of ensuring you get paid and enforcing contracts | 27% | 26% | 24% | 26% | 33% | 29% | 20% | 35% | | Ease of making a profit | 22% | 18% | 22% | 19% | 24% | 24% | 26% | 30% | | None of these barriers significant | 24% | 31% | 30% | 15% | 8% | 20% | 9% | 17% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies with regards to obtaining basic information, identifying who to make contact with, establishing an initial dialogue, not having an office or site, having a home bias and exchange rates and currency. IP active companies were more likely to indicate that each of these difficulties or problems were apparent.

Furthermore, IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to indicate that at least one of these was a barrier to conducting business overseas.

______________________________________________________________________

28 The wording here has been amended to be comparable with the 2008 report. 29 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results. 30 This base is 384 respondents as it relates to those who had indicated that they expected to need to modify their products or service for customers. Table 139: Barriers to conducting overseas business (defined as being difficult or extremely difficult) by IP activity

| % scoring 4 or 5 | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | IP active | | | | | | | | | | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Obtaining basic information | 25% | 24% | 29% | 18% | 27% | 29% | 14% | 20% | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Identifying who to make contact with | 49% | 46% | 51% | 65% | 38% | 51% | 49% | 51% | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Establishing an initial dialogue | 36% | 34% | 36% | 41% | 46% | 37% | 35% | 35% | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Building relationships | 39% | 41% | 42% | 41% | 50% | 31% | 35% | 42% | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Cultural differences outside of any language barriers | 25% | 28% | 28% | 18% | 23% | 19% | 11% | 31% | | Base | | 437 | 104 | 89 | 17 | 23 | 95 | 34 | 75 | | Not having an office or site | 40% | 38% | 43% | 47% | 48% | 41% | 32% | 39% | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Home bias | 32% | 30% | 32% | 47% | 23% | 30% | 32% | 35% | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | The costs associated with doing business | 34% | 31% | 32% | 47% | 35% | 33% | 38% | 39% | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Finding the necessary management time | 39% | 45% | 38% | 47% | 31% | 34% | 32% | 42% | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Exchange rates and currency | 37% | 31% | 34% | 41% | 38% | 38% | 43% | 41% | | Base | | 17 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 7 | | Problems obtaining work permits or visas | 12% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 29% | | Base | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | None of these barriers significant | 9% | 9% | 11% | 6% | 8% | 8% | 8% | 11% |

31 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results. | Perceptions of the market (% scoring 4 or 5) | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | |--------------------------------------------|------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----| | Ease of negotiating framework | 40% | 40% | 33% | 41%| 62%| 37%| 43%| 45%| | Ease of negotiating language and culture | 30% | 31% | 26% | 12%| 31%| 33%| 24%| 35%| | Ease of protecting Intellectual Property | 26% | 21% | 24% | 18%| 31%| 26%| 27%| 35%| | Ease of logistics of doing business | 37% | 33% | 30% | 53%| 38%| 37%| 43%| 43%| | Ease of recruiting and retaining suitable staff | 17% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 67%| 100%| 67%| 29%| | Ease of making modifications to your products or services | 20% | 18% | 23% | 13%| 10%| 22%| 36%| 13%| | Ease of ensuring you get paid and enforcing contracts | 29% | 26% | 32% | 35%| 31%| 25%| 19%| 38%| | Ease of making a profit | 23% | 19% | 25% | 12%| 27%| 18%| 29%| 30%| | None of these barriers significant | 14% | 16% | 20% | 6% | 4% | 14%| 3% | 16%|

32 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results.

33 This base is 220 respondents as it relates to those who had indicated that they expected to need to modify their products or service for customers. | Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | |--------------|------|-----|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----| | | | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Obtaining basic information | 18% | 13% | 19% | 30% | 9% | 24% | 0% | 24% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Identifying who to make contact with | 41% | 34% | 42% | 40% | 36% | 47% | 57% | 44% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Establishing an initial dialogue | 30% | 25% | 33% | 30% | 18% | 30% | 43% | 28% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Building relationships | 34% | 31% | 33% | 50% | 45% | 36% | 38% | 40% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Cultural differences outside of any language barriers | 22% | 22% | 19% | 30% | 36% | 25% | 29% | 16% | | Base | 426 | 118 | 151 | 10 | 11 | 96 | 18 | 22 | | Not having an office or site | 27% | 25% | 26% | 30% | 36% | 27% | 28% | 32% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Home bias | 24% | 21% | 26% | 30% | 18% | 17% | 52% | 24% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | The costs associated with doing business | 30% | 26% | 31% | 30% | 36% | 29% | 33% | 40% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Finding the necessary management time | 33% | 26% | 33% | 30% | 45% | 37% | 43% | 36% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Exchange rates and currency | 30% | 25% | 34% | 40% | 27% | 26% | 24% | 44% | | Base | 21 | 8 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 2 | | Problems obtaining work permits or visas | 19% | 25% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 33% | 50% | 0% | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | None of these barriers significant | 19% | 27% | 16% | 20% | 9% | 17% | 14% | 8% |

Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results.

### Perceptions of the market (defined as being fairly difficult and very difficult)

| | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | |--------------------------------|------|-----|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----| | Ease of negotiating framework | | 31% | 29% | 25% | 40%| 36%| 40%| 29%| 44%| | Ease of negotiating language and culture | | 22% | 16% | 21% | 20%| 18%| 26%| 38%| 24%| | Ease of protecting Intellectual Property | | 17% | 18% | 12% | 10%| 9% | 23%| 29%| 20%| | Ease of logistics of doing business | | 30% | 22% | 30% | 40%| 45%| 35%| 24%| 40%| | Ease of recruiting and retaining suitable staff | | 14% | 0% | 33% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 50%| 0% | | Ease of making modifications to your products or services | | 18% | 18% | 17% | 0% | 0% | 16%| 29%| 25%| | Ease of ensuring you get paid and enforcing contracts | | 26% | 27% | 20% | 10%| 36%| 33%| 24%| 28%| | Ease of making a profit | | 22% | 17% | 20% | 30%| 18%| 29%| 19%| 32%| | None of these barriers significant | | 33% | 43% | 35% | 30%| 18%| 26%| 19%| 20%|

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users with regards to identifying who to make contact with, building relationships, cultural differences outside of any language barriers and having a home bias. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to indicate that at least one of these was a barrier to conducting business overseas.

______________________________________________________________________

35 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results.

36 This base is 164 respondents as it relates to those who had indicated that they expected to need to modify their products or service for customers. Table 140: Barriers to conducting overseas business by UKTI usage

| % scoring 4 or 5 | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|---------|-------|--------|---------|-------| | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Obtaining basic information | 21% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Identifying who to make contact with | 49% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Establishing an initial dialogue | 35% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Building relationships | 39% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Cultural differences outside of any language barriers | 26% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Not having an office or site | 33% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Home bias | 30% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | The costs associated with doing business | 33% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Finding the necessary management time | 38% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Exchange rates and currency | 33% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Problems obtaining work permits or visas | 22% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | None of these barriers significant | 11% | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 |

Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results.

### Perceptions of the market (defined as being fairly difficult and very difficult)

| Perceived Barriers | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | |---------------------------------------------------------|------|-----|-----|-----|----|----|-----|----|----| | Ease of negotiating framework | 38% | 38% | 34% | 33% | 50%| 40%| 37% | 43%| | Ease of negotiating language and culture | 28% | 26% | 27% | 11% | 21%| 32%| 28% | 29%| | Ease of protecting Intellectual Property | 22% | 19% | 19% | 22% | 17%| 23%| 24% | 30%| | Ease of logistics of doing business | 36% | 31% | 32% | 50% | 42%| 36%| 37% | 44%| | Ease of recruiting and retaining suitable staff | 30% | 0% | 33% | 0% | 100%| 25%| 50% | 29%| | Ease of making modifications to your products or services| 18% | 14% | 17% | 14% | 0% | 20%| 39% | 14%| | Ease of ensuring you get paid and enforcing contracts | 28% | 26% | 24% | 34% | 33%| 30%| 17% | 36%| | Ease of making a profit | 23% | 20% | 17% | 23% | 25%| 25%| 22% | 31%| | None of these barriers significant | 20% | 27% | 22% | 17% | 8% | 20%| 9% | 18%|

______________________________________________________________________

38 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results.

39 This base is 274 respondents as it relates to those who had indicated that they expected to need to modify their products or service for customers. | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | |----------------|------|-----|-----|-----|---|----|----|----|----| | | | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Obtaining basic information | 21% | 16% | 21% | 22% | 38% | 24% | 8% | 42% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Identifying who to make contact with | 38% | 34% | 39% | 22% | 23% | 48% | 58% | 33% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Establishing an initial dialogue | 30% | 27% | 28% | 22% | 31% | 38% | 33% | 42% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Building relationships | 31% | 33% | 25% | 44% | 62% | 33% | 17% | 42% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Cultural differences outside of any language barriers | 18% | 17% | 16% | 11% | 31% | 17% | 25% | 33% | | Base | 270 | 93 | 96 | 9 | 11 | 41 | 10 | 10 | | Not having an office or site | 34% | 33% | 32% | 56% | 36% | 37% | 30% | 20% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Home bias | 23% | 23% | 25% | 33% | 15% | 19% | 17% | 33% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | The costs associated with doing business | 31% | 29% | 31% | 22% | 46% | 29% | 42% | 42% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Finding the necessary management time | 32% | 28% | 34% | 22% | 31% | 38% | 17% | 50% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Exchange rates and currency | 34% | 36% | 34% | 22% | 23% | 33% | 25% | 50% | | Base40 | 15 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | | Problems obtaining work permits or visas | 7% | 14% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | None of these barriers significant | 20% | 20% | 24% | 33% | 0% | 14% | 17% | 17% |

40 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results. Perceptions of the market (defined as being fairly difficult and very difficult)

| Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | |------|-----|-----|-----|---|----|----|----|----| | Ease of negotiating framework | 31% | 30% | 20% | 56% | 62% | 36% | 42% | 58% | | Ease of negotiating language and culture | 21% | 19% | 16% | 22% | 38% | 21% | 33% | 58% | | Ease of protecting Intellectual Property | 21% | 21% | 13% | 0% | 38% | 29% | 42% | 42% | | Ease of logistics of doing business | 28% | 22% | 27% | 44% | 38% | 36% | 33% | 33% | | Ease of recruiting and retaining suitable staff | 15 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | | Ease of making modifications to your products or services | 22% | 26% | 22% | 0% | 17% | 19% | 17% | 33% | | Ease of ensuring you get paid and enforcing contracts | 26% | 27% | 25% | 11% | 30% | 24% | 33% | 25% | | Ease of making a profit | 22% | 14% | 28% | 11% | 23% | 21% | 42% | 25% | | None of these barriers significant | 31% | 36% | 42% | 11% | 8% | 21% | 8% | 8% |

These projected barriers were summarised along with barriers captured in the drivers of market section of the questionnaire, which provided data on ‘own experience’ barriers where respondents indicated that something had been difficult or very difficult.

Table 141: Barriers summary

Firms have been defined as perceiving significant ‘legal & regulatory’ barriers if they scored 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale for…

- Problems obtaining work permits or visas for staff to allow them to relocate to <market> (projected)
- Or, Difficulty negotiating the legal and regulatory framework or standards in <market> (own experience)
- Or, Difficulty protecting Intellectual Property (own experience)
- Or, Difficulty ensuring you get paid and enforcing contracts (own experience)

Firms have been defined as perceiving significant ‘contacts’ barriers if they scored 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale for…

- Identifying who to make contact with in the first instance or finding a suitable partner (projected)
- Or, Establishing an initial dialogue with prospective customers or business partners (projected)
- Or, Building relationships with key influencers or decision makers (projected)

41 Note that these are very small base sizes since only respondents answering about overseas sites were asked this question. Take great care when interpreting these results. 42 This base is 110 respondents as it relates to those who had indicated that they expected to need to modify their products or service for customers. Firms have been defined as perceiving significant ‘information’ barriers if they scored 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale for…

- Obtaining basic information about doing business in <market> (projected)

Firms have been defined as perceiving significant ‘fixed costs’ barriers if they scored 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale for…

- The costs associated with doing business in <market> (projected)
- Or, Finding the necessary management time to devote to doing business in <market> (projected)
- Or, Exchange rates and currency (projected)
- Or, Not having an office or site in <market> (projected)
- Or, Difficulty dealing with the logistics of doing business in <market> (own experience)
- Or, Difficulty with staff recruitment and retention (own experience)

Firms have been defined as perceiving significant ‘language & cultural’ barriers if they scored 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale for…

- Cultural differences outside of any language barriers (projected)
- Or, Difficulty negotiating the culture and language in <market> (own experience)

Firms have been defined as perceiving significant ‘bias’ barriers if they scored 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale for…

- A bias or preference on the part of overseas customers for dealing with domestic firms (projected)
- Or, A bias or preference on the part of UK customers for UK goods/call centres/R&D (projected).

The table below shows the proportions of companies scoring against each of these summary categories as well as an analysis of the number of barriers mentioned (with this latter analysis not taking account of the market perceptions data, in order to provide comparability with previous research).

The results follow the same pattern as the 2008 survey with fixed costs barriers and contacts barriers being the most important barriers, followed by legal and regulatory barriers.

The ‘legal and regulatory’ category is mainly based on market perceptions data (rather than data specifically on barriers), covering perceptions in relation to negotiating the legal and regulatory framework or standards, intellectual property protection and contract enforcement (as well as opinions on the extent to which the obtaining of work permits or visas is a barrier in the case of firms with overseas sites).

In the 2009 survey, with the exception of ‘information’, the survey sample was more likely to report barriers than that of 2008. In 2009, nearly eight in ten (78%) companies stated that ‘fixed costs’ were problematic in comparison to nearly two thirds (63%) in the 2008 survey. Similarly, in the 2009 survey around six in ten companies stated that legal and regulatory (58%) or contacts (61%) were barriers in comparison to under half in the 2008 survey (42% and 46% respectively). Almost all companies (91%) mentioned at least one barrier to international trade whereas in 2008 this was just under eight in ten (72%).

These differences are again likely to be driven by the differences in sample structure. Firstly, the 2009 sample contains firms which are more experienced exporters than that of 2008. One consequence of this, given that firms tend to enter the easiest markets first, moving to more difficult countries as they increase their international activities, is that a sample of firms which have entered more markets is more likely to include firms which have entered more difficult markets. Focusing questions on the most challenging market is therefore likely to give rise to the reporting of more barriers.

A second reason may be the higher proportion of users of UKTI services (65%) than in the 2008 sample (35%). Previous surveys of users and non-users of UKTI services indicate that users are more likely to report barriers. A higher proportion of users in the sample are therefore likely to increase the reporting of barriers.

Table 142: Barriers to conducting overseas business

| Total | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Legal and regulatory | 58% | 55% | 48% | 59% | 73% | 63% | 62% | 70% | | Contacts | 61% | 56% | 60% | 67% | 62% | 64% | 66% | 66% | | Information | 21% | 18% | 22% | 22% | 22% | 27% | 9% | 21% | | Fixed costs | 78% | 72% | 76% | 89% | 86% | 79% | 86% | 83% | | Language and cultural | 37% | 35% | 34% | 30% | 43% | 38% | 36% | 44% | | Bias | 28% | 25% | 29% | 41% | 22% | 23% | 40% | 32% | | At least one barrier | 91% | 86% | 90% | 96% | 95% | 94% | 97% | 94% | | No significant barriers | 8% | 13% | 11% | 4% | 3% | 5% | 3% | 6% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies with regard to all barriers to conducting overseas business. Furthermore, IP active companies were more likely to identify at least one barrier to international trade than non-IP active companies. As with the 2008 sample, IP active firms were more likely to report barriers of all types.

Across both groups, fixed cost barriers, contacts barriers and legal and regulatory barriers were the most prevalent. Table 143: Barriers to conducting overseas business by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|---------|------|--------|---------|------| | **IP active** | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Legal and regulatory | | 64% | 60% | 61% | 65% | 77% | 60% | 68% | 71% | | | Contacts | | 66% | 63% | 68% | 71% | 62% | 66% | 65% | 69% | | | Information | | 25% | 24% | 29% | 18% | 27% | 29% | 14% | 20% | | | Fixed costs | | 82% | 79% | 76% | 94% | 85% | 86% | 95% | 82% | | | Language and cultural| | 40% | 41% | 37% | 24% | 42% | 40% | 30% | 48% | | | Bias | | 32% | 30% | 32% | 47% | 23% | 30% | 32% | 35% | | | At least one barrier | | 95% | 94% | 93% | 100% | 96% | 97% | 100% | 94% | | | No significant barriers | | 5% | 6% | 9% | 0% | 4% | 4% | 0% | 7% | | | **Non-IP active** | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Legal and regulatory | | 52% | 51% | 40% | 50% | 64% | 66% | 52% | 68% | | | Contacts | | 56% | 50% | 55% | 60% | 64% | 62% | 67% | 56% | | | Information | | 18% | 13% | 19% | 30% | 9% | 24% | 0% | 24% | | | Fixed costs | | 73% | 67% | 75% | 80% | 91% | 72% | 71% | 88% | | | Language and cultural| | 34% | 29% | 33% | 40% | 45% | 36% | 48% | 32% | | | Bias | | 24% | 21% | 26% | 30% | 18% | 17% | 52% | 24% | | | At least one barrier | | 87% | 80% | 88% | 90% | 91% | 91% | 90% | 96% | | | No significant barriers | | 11% | 19% | 12% | 10% | 0% | 6% | 10% | 0% | |

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users with regards to contacts, language and culture, and bias. UKTI users were more likely to identify at least one barrier to international trade than non-UKTI users. As with the 2008 sample, UKTI users were more likely to report barriers of all types. Across both groups, fixed cost barriers, contacts barriers and legal and regulatory barriers were the most prevalent. Table 144: Barriers to conducting overseas business by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Legal and regulatory | | 60% | 57% | 53% | 61% | 71% | 61% | 57% | 70% | | Contacts | | 65% | 59% | 68% | 78% | 63% | 64% | 67% | 68% | | Information | | 21% | 20% | 24% | 22% | 13% | 27% | 9% | 19% | | Fixed costs | | 79% | 72% | 78% | 89% | 88% | 80% | 89% | 83% | | Language and cultural| | 41% | 40% | 42% | 33% | 42% | 40% | 37% | 43% | | Bias | | 30% | 27% | 31% | 44% | 25% | 25% | 46% | 32% | | At least one barrier | | 93% | 87% | 95% | 100% | 92% | 94% | 98% | 95% | | No significant barriers | | 6% | 12% | 5% | 0% | 4% | 5% | 2% | 5% |

| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Legal and regulatory | | 54% | 52% | 40% | 56% | 77% | 69% | 83% | 75% | | Contacts | | 53% | 51% | 49% | 44% | 62% | 64% | 58% | 50% | | Information | | 21% | 16% | 21% | 22% | 38% | 24% | 8% | 42% | | Fixed costs | | 74% | 73% | 72% | 89% | 85% | 74% | 75% | 83% | | Language and cultural| | 29% | 28% | 23% | 22% | 46% | 31% | 33% | 58% | | Bias | | 23% | 23% | 25% | 33% | 15% | 19% | 17% | 33% | | At least one barrier | | 87% | 86% | 82% | 89% | 100% | 93% | 92% | 92% | | No significant barriers | | 13% | 14% | 19% | 11% | 0% | 7% | 8% | 8% |

In terms of the number of barriers mentioned by companies these are similar to last year. However in the 2008 survey just two in ten (21%) indicated that they had experienced no significant barriers to conducting international business whilst in 2009 this has reduced to one in seven (14%).

Table 145: The number of barriers to conducting overseas business

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | One | | 12% | 11% | 13% | 11% | 11% | 14% | 7% | 10% | | Two | | 14% | 16% | 15% | 15% | 22% | 12% | 16% | 12% | | Three | | 17% | 16% | 14% | 19% | 11% | 19% | 24% | 19% | | Four or more | | 43% | 39% | 44% | 44% | 49% | 42% | 43% | 49% | | At least one barrier | | 86% | 81% | 86% | 89% | 92% | 87% | 90% | 90% | | No significant barriers | | 14% | 19% | 14% | 11% | 8% | 13% | 10% | 10% |

IP active companies were more likely to indicate significant barriers to conducting international business than non-IP active companies. Table 146: The number of barriers to conducting overseas business by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | One | 9% | 9% | 9% | 6% | 8% | 11% | 5% | 7% | | Two | 15% | 18% | 11% | 18% | 19% | 12% | 24% | 12% | | Three | 18% | 16% | 18% | 24% | 12% | 22% | 16% | 18% | | Four or more | 49% | 48% | 51% | 47% | 54% | 46% | 46% | 52% | | At least one barrier | 91% | 91% | 89% | 94% | 92% | 92% | 92% | 89% | | No significant barriers | 9% | 9% | 11% | 6% | 8% | 8% | 8% | 11% |

| Non-IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | One | 15% | 12% | 16% | 20% | 18% | 17% | 10% | 20% | | Two | 14% | 14% | 17% | 10% | 27% | 11% | 0% | 12% | | Three | 15% | 16% | 12% | 10% | 9% | 16% | 38% | 20% | | Four or more | 37% | 32% | 40% | 40% | 36% | 38% | 38% | 40% | | At least one barrier | 81% | 73% | 84% | 80% | 91% | 83% | 86% | 92% | | No significant barriers | 19% | 27% | 16% | 20% | 9% | 17% | 14% | 8% |

UKTI users were more likely to indicate significant barriers to conducting international business than non-UKTI users.

Table 147: The number of barriers to conducting overseas business by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | One | 12% | 7% | 14% | 11% | 8% | 16% | 9% | 10% | | Two | 13% | 13% | 16% | 17% | 17% | 12% | 11% | 13% | | Three | 18% | 20% | 14% | 28% | 8% | 18% | 24% | 20% | | Four or more | 46% | 41% | 49% | 44% | 54% | 43% | 48% | 48% | | At least one barrier | 89% | 81% | 93% | 100% | 87% | 88% | 91% | 91% | | No significant barriers | 11% | 19% | 7% | 0% | 13% | 12% | 9% | 9% |

| Non-UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | One | 12% | 15% | 13% | 11% | 15% | 10% | 0% | 8% | | Two | 17% | 20% | 13% | 11% | 31% | 12% | 33% | 8% | | Three | 14% | 10% | 15% | 0% | 15% | 24% | 25% | 8% | | Four or more | 37% | 36% | 36% | 44% | 38% | 40% | 25% | 58% | | At least one barrier | 80% | 80% | 76% | 67% | 100% | 86% | 83% | 83% | | No significant barriers | 20% | 20% | 24% | 33% | 0% | 14% | 17% | 17% | 8. OPPORTUNITIES IN EMERGING AND FAST GROWING

8.1 Opportunities in Emerging and Fast Growing Markets

All companies were asked to indicate if they considered that a range of emerging markets offered a ‘good opportunity’ for their company over the next 2 years, a ‘possible opportunity’, or if it was ‘unlikely to be an opportunity’ or if they were ‘already doing business there’.

In the 2009 survey sample, the highest proportion of firms were in Saudi Arabia (42%), followed by China (33%), India (32%) and South Africa (32%). These were somewhat higher proportions in each market than found in the 2008 sample, and there was also a greater difference between the proportions in the most, and second most popular markets. In 2008 the sample firms were most likely to report being in India (19%), Saudi Arabia (18%) or China (17%).

Table 148: Opinions on the opportunities in emerging and fast growing markets

| Country | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Russia | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Already doing business | 26% | 24% | 17% | 52% | 30% | 28% | 22% | 43% | | Good opportunity | 9% | 10% | 8% | 4% | 11% | 11% | 19% | 6% | | Possible opportunity | 26% | 30% | 29% | 22% | 19% | 22% | 33% | 22% | | Unlikely | 37% | 35% | 46% | 19% | 41% | 38% | 26% | 28% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 2% | | Turkey | | | | | | | | | | Already doing business | 28% | 21% | 19% | 33% | 38% | 32% | 34% | 50% | | Good opportunity | 9% | 8% | 9% | 4% | 11% | 11% | 12% | 5% | | Possible opportunity | 25% | 29% | 26% | 22% | 19% | 22% | 26% | 22% | | Unlikely | 37% | 41% | 45% | 37% | 30% | 34% | 28% | 23% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 1% | 4% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | South Africa | | | | | | | | | | Already doing business | 32% | 26% | 20% | 48% | 32% | 32% | 57% | 53% | | Good opportunity | 9% | 10% | 9% | 7% | 8% | 8% | 10% | 6% | | Possible opportunity | 24% | 24% | 29% | 15% | 24% | 28% | 17% | 15% | | Unlikely | 34% | 39% | 41% | 26% | 32% | 32% | 16% | 26% | | Don’t know | 1% | 2% | 2% | 4% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Saudi Arabia | | | | | | | | | | Already doing business | 42% | 37% | 30% | 52% | 51% | 47% | 52% | 64% | | Good opportunity | 14% | 16% | 12% | 22% | 11% | 15% | 16% | 11% | | Possible opportunity | 19% | 23% | 24% | 11% | 22% | 17% | 12% | 10% | | Unlikely | 24% | 23% | 33% | 11% | 16% | 21% | 21% | 15% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 2% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Brazil | | | | | | | | | | Already doing business | 18% | 14% | 10% | 19% | 32% | 20% | 22% | 37% | | Good opportunity | 8% | 6% | 11% | 7% | 11% | 7% | 12% | 6% | | Possible opportunity | 25% | 22% | 23% | 30% | 30% | 28% | 29% | 25% | | Unlikely | 47% | 56% | 53% | 37% | 24% | 45% | 36% | 32% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 2% | 7% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | The results from the 2009 survey have also been summarised as follows:

**Table 149: Summary of opportunities in emerging and fast growing markets**

| Firms have been defined as ‘already in’ if… | |--------------------------------------------| | • They are already in at least one emerging/fast growing market |

| Firms have been defined as perceiving a ‘good opportunity’ if… | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | • Not already in any of the emerging/fast growing markets | | • But feel that at least one is a ‘good’ opportunity |

| Firms have been defined as perceiving a ‘possible opportunity’ if… | |------------------------------------------------------------------| | • Not already in any of the emerging/fast growing markets | | • Feel that none of the markets are a ‘good’ opportunity | | • But feel that at least one is a ‘possible’ opportunity |

| Firms have been defined as ‘unlikely’ if… | |------------------------------------------| | • Not already in any of the emerging/fast growing markets | | • And feel that none of the markets are either a ‘good’ or ‘possible’ opportunity. |

The table below depicts the results of this analysis. A comparison of the 2008 and 2009 survey reveals that seven in ten companies (70%) in the 2009 survey sample are ‘already in’ these emerging markets, compared to almost half (45%) in 2008 sample. The proportion of firms in the 2009 survey sample which indicated that they considered that all of the emerging markets listed were ‘unlikely’ to offer market opportunities (6%) was also half that of the 2008 survey sample (12%). These differences are likely to be due to a higher proportion of experienced firms in the 2009 sample and the higher proportion of UKTI users in the sample than that of 2008.

Table 150: Summary of the opportunities in emerging and fast growing markets

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Already in | 70% | 65% | 59% | 74% | 73% | | | | | 79% | 76% | 82% | | Good opportunity| 12% | 10% | 14% | 15% | 14% | | | | | 10% | 17% | 11% | | Possible opportunity| 12% | 15% | 16% | 0% | 14% | | | | | 8% | 7% | 5% | | Unlikely | 6% | 9% | 11% | 7% | 0% | | | | | 3% | 0% | 2% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 0% | 0% |

Just over three quarters (76%) of IP active companies reported already being in these markets compared to just under two thirds (63%) of non-IP active companies. Furthermore, the propensity to be ‘already in’ these markets is greater for larger and older companies. A lower proportion of IP active (2%) than non-IP active (10%) firms indicated that they considered emerging markets to be unlikely to offer market opportunities.

Table 151: Summary of the opportunities in emerging and fast growing markets by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Already in | 76% | 76% | 67% | 82% | 77% | | | | | 76% | 84% | 83% | | Good opportunity| 12% | 7% | 16% | 12% | 12% | | | | | 12% | 14% | 13% | | Possible opportunity| 9% | 14% | 14% | 0% | 12% | | | | | 9% | 3% | 2% | | Unlikely | 2% | 4% | 3% | 6% | 0% | | | | | 2% | 0% | 1% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | | | | | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Already in | 63% | 57% | 54% | 60% | 64% | | | | | 82% | 62% | 80% | | Good opportunity| 12% | 13% | 13% | 20% | 18% | | | | | 8% | 24% | 4% | | Possible opportunity| 14% | 16% | 18% | 0% | 18% | | | | | 7% | 14% | 12% | | Unlikely | 10% | 14% | 15% | 10% | 0% | | | | | 3% | 0% | 4% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 1% | 10% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 0% | 0% |

Users of UKTI services were more likely to be ‘already in’ the emerging markets than non-users and conversely were less likely to say that these regions were ‘unlikely’ to offer market opportunities. Table 152: Summary of the opportunities in emerging and fast growing markets by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Already in | | 74% | 73% | 65% | 78% | 75% | 78% | 74% | 84% | | Good opportunity | | 12% | 10% | 14% | 17% | 13% | 12% | 20% | 10% | | Possible opportunity | | 10% | 13% | 14% | 0% | 13% | 8% | 7% | 3% | | Unlikely | | 4% | 4% | 6% | 6% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 2% | | Don’t know | | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Already in | | 60% | 54% | 50% | 67% | 69% | 83% | 83% | 67% | | Good opportunity | | 11% | 11% | 13% | 11% | 15% | 5% | 8% | 17% | | Possible opportunity | | 17% | 19% | 20% | 0% | 15% | 10% | 8% | 17% | | Unlikely | | 12% | 16% | 18% | 11% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | Don’t know | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 11% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 9. ECONOMIC CLIMATE

9.1 Downturn in UK, US and European Markets

All companies who were currently trading were asked to indicate whether their business has been negatively affected by the downturn in either the UK and US or European markets over the last year. Those who said ‘Yes’ to either of these were then asked whether this had prompted their company to devote more attention to any of the emerging or fast growing economies (namely Russia, Turkey, South Africa, Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates, Brazil, Mexico, China and India).

Overall companies were more likely to feel negatively affected by the economic downturn in the UK and USA markets than in Europe, with companies over six years of age most likely to feel the effects of economic downturn in the UK and USA but least likely to feel the impact of economic downturn in Europe.

The proportion of companies negatively affected by the economic downturn in the UK and USA (69%) is much higher than the comparable level reported in 2008 when just over four in ten (42%) reported being negatively impacted by the economic downturn in the UK and USA.

Table 153: Impact of economic downturn in UK and USA

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 69% | 67% | 67% | 74% | 73% | 68% | 74% | 76% | | No | 29% | 30% | 32% | 26% | 24% | 30% | 26% | 22% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 3% | 0% | 2% |

IP active companies were more likely to state that they were negatively impacted by the downturn in the UK and USA markets than non-IP active companies, most especially larger, older companies. This is in contrast to the 2008 survey sample in which almost equal proportions of IP active and non-IP active firms indicated that they had been affected by the downturn.

Table 154: Impact of economic downturn in UK and USA by IP activity

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | IP active | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 74% | 73% | 72% | 76% | 69% | 74% | 70% | 77% | | No | 25% | 24% | 27% | 24% | 27% | 23% | 30% | 22% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 3% | 0% | 1% | | Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 65% | 62% | 64% | 70% | 82% | 62% | 81% | 72% | | No | 33% | 34% | 35% | 30% | 18% | 36% | 19% | 24% | | Don’t know | 2% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 4% | UKTI users and non-UKTI users were equally likely to indicate that their business was negatively affected by the downturn in the UK and USA markets.

In a UKTI PIMS survey of 834 users of UKTI services which took place in October/November 2008 44% indicated that they had been affected by the downturn in the US or UK; this is similar to the 42% in the 2008 survey sample who were surveyed in July/August 2008. In a UKTI PIMS survey of 979 users of UKTI services which took place in January/February 2009, 60% indicated that they had been affected by the downturn. This rose to 65% in the survey of 985 users in March/April 2009. This is somewhat lower than the 70% of UKTI users in this survey.

Table 155: Impact of economic downturn in UK and USA by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Yes | 70% | 70% | 70% | 78% | 67% | 65% | 70% | 79% | | | No | 28% | 27% | 30% | 22% | 29% | 32% | 30% | 20% | | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 3% | 0% | 1% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Yes | 67% | 62% | 63% | 67% | 85% | 79% | 92% | 50% | | | No | 31% | 34% | 36% | 33% | 15% | 19% | 8% | 42% | | | Don’t know | 2% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 8% |

The impact of the economic downturn in Europe appears to have had less impact than in the UK and USA, with the impact greatest for older and larger companies.

Table 156: Impact of the economic downturn in Europe

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Yes | 60% | 57% | 55% | 70% | 70% | 60% | 66% | 69% | | | No | 38% | 41% | 43% | 30% | 27% | 39% | 33% | 30% | | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 2% | 2% |

IP active companies were more likely to state they were impacted by the economic downturn in Europe than non-IP active companies. Table 157: Impact of the economic downturn in Europe by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 63% | 57% | 58% | 76% | 65% | 67% | 65% | 70% | | No | 35% | 41% | 41% | 24% | 31% | 33% | 35% | 29% | | Don’t know| 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 1% |

| Non-IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 57% | 57% | 54% | 60% | 82% | 54% | 67% | 64% | | No | 41% | 40% | 45% | 40% | 18% | 45% | 29% | 32% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 5% | 4% |

UKTI users were slightly more likely to agree that their business had been negatively affected by the downturn in the European markets than non-UKTI users.

Table 158: Impact of the economic downturn in Europe by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 62% | 59% | 57% | 72% | 67% | 62% | 61% | 71% | | No | 37% | 39% | 42% | 28% | 29% | 38% | 37% | 28% | | Don’t know | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 1% | 2% | 1% |

| Non-UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 57% | 54% | 53% | 67% | 77% | 55% | 83% | 50% | | No | 42% | 43% | 46% | 33% | 23% | 45% | 17% | 42% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 8% |

All companies were asked to indicate whether the decline in the UK, USA or European markets has prompted them to devote more attention to any of the emerging or fast growing economies. There was some ambivalence here with nearly a third saying ‘yes’ and just over four in ten saying ‘no’. Older and larger companies were more likely to indicate that they had devoted more attention to the emerging or fast growing markets as a result of the decline in the UK, USA or European markets.

Table 159: Whether devoted more attention to any of the emerging or fast growing markets

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 32% | 31% | 25% | 41% | 32% | 34% | 36% | 41% | | No | 41% | 39% | 47% | 41% | 38% | 39% | 45% | 37% | | Don’t know | 27% | 30% | 28% | 19% | 30% | 28% | 19% | 22% |

IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to indicate that they had devoted more attention to the emerging or fast growing markets as a result of the downturn in the UK, USA or European markets. Table 160: Whether devoted more attention to any of the emerging or fast growing markets by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 39% | 42% | 34% | 41% | 27% | | | | | 37% | 38% | 45% | | No | 38% | 31% | 41% | 41% | 38% | | | | | 39% | 43% | 37% | | Don’t know | 24% | 27% | 24% | 35% | 24% | | | | | 24% | 19% | 18% | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | | | | | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 25% | 22% | 20% | 40% | 45% | | | | | 30% | 33% | 28% | | No | 45% | 46% | 50% | 40% | 36% | | | | | 38% | 48% | 36% | | Don’t know | 30% | 32% | 30% | 20% | 18% | | | | | 31% | 19% | 36% |

UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to indicate that they had devoted more attention to the emerging or fast growing markets as a result of the economic downturn in the UK, USA or European markets.

Table 161: Whether devoted more attention to any of the emerging or fast growing markets by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | | | | | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 35% | 39% | 28% | 50% | 38% | | | | | 33% | 37% | 43% | | No | 39% | 36% | 45% | 39% | 29% | | | | | 38% | 41% | 38% | | Don’t know | 26% | 26% | 27% | 11% | 33% | | | | | 29% | 22% | 20% | | Non-UKTI users | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | | | | | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 24% | 22% | 22% | 22% | 23% | | | | | 36% | 33% | 25% | | No | 46% | 44% | 50% | 44% | 54% | | | | | 43% | 58% | 33% | | Don’t know | 29% | 35% | 29% | 33% | 23% | | | | | 21% | 8% | 42% |

9.2 Economic Growth

All companies that were currently exporting were asked whether, in the last year, their business has benefited from sustained economic growth or increasing demand in any overseas countries. They were then asked to consider their overseas business and whether they saw the economic downturn as offering their company increased, reduced, or about the same opportunities.

Firms established for more than 5 years and with over 50 employees were more likely to feel that their business had benefited from sustained growth or increased demand in overseas countries. Table 162: Benefit from sustained growth or increased demand in any overseas country

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 903 | 230 | 248 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 196 | 58 | 107 | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 53% | 47% | 46% | 59% | 65% | | | | | 55% | 67% | 68% | | No | 44% | 51% | 52% | 37% | 24% | | | | | 41% | 31% | 27% | | Don’t know | 3% | 2% | 2% | 4% | 4% | | | | | 2% | 2% | 5% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding whether or not they had benefited from sustained growth or increased demand in overseas countries. Those companies described as IP active were more likely than non-IP active firms to indicate that in the last year they had benefited from sustained growth or increased demand in overseas countries.

Table 163: Benefit from sustained growth or increased demand in any overseas country by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 454 | 105 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 82 | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 63% | 56% | 61% | 71% | 62% | | | | | 60% | 68% | 76% | | No | 34% | 42% | 38% | 24% | 23% | | | | | 38% | 30% | 22% | | Don’t know | 3% | 2% | 1% | 6% | 15% | | | | | 2% | 3% | 2% | | Non-IP active | 449 | 125 | 158 | 10 | 11 | | | | | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 43% | 39% | 37% | 40% | 73% | | | | | 49% | 67% | 44% | | No | 53% | 59% | 60% | 60% | 27% | | | | | 44% | 33% | 44% | | Don’t know | 4% | 2% | 3% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 6% | 0% | 12% |

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding whether or not they had benefited from sustained growth or increased demand in overseas countries. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to report that in the last year they had benefited from sustained growth or increased demand in overseas countries.

In this survey 58% of respondents who were UKTI users indicated that they had benefited from sustained growth or increased demand in any overseas country. This is the same proportion as that in a UKTI PIMS survey of UKTI users in January/February 2009. Table 164: Benefit from sustained growth or increased demand in any overseas country by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 618 | 134 | 147 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 95 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Yes | 58% | 57% | 48% | 61% | 71% | 56% | 72% | 69% | | | No | 39% | 41% | 48% | 39% | 21% | 41% | 26% | 27% | | | Don’t know | 3% | 1% | 3% | 0% | 8% | 3% | 2% | 3% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 285 | 96 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Yes | 42% | 32% | 42% | 56% | 54% | 50% | 50% | 58% | | | No | 54% | 66% | 57% | 33% | 31% | 43% | 50% | 25% | | | Don’t know | 4% | 2% | 1% | 11% | 15% | 7% | 0% | 17% |

Almost equal proportions of the survey sample indicated that the economic downturn had offered increased opportunities or about the same opportunities or reduced opportunities (32%, 33% and 32% respectively). Younger companies were slightly more likely to indicate that the downturn had offered them increased opportunities.

Table 165: Whether economic downturn has offered increased or reduced opportunities

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Increased opportunities | 32% | 36% | 32% | 33% | 24% | 31% | 26% | 31% | | About the same/no impact | 33% | 29% | 34% | 37% | 32% | 37% | 36% | 30% | | Reduced opportunities | 32% | 32% | 32% | 26% | 41% | 30% | 29% | 40% | | Don’t know | 3% | 3% | 2% | 4% | 3% | 3% | 9% | 0% |

Equal proportions of IP and non-IP active firms indicated that the downturn offered increased opportunities (32%). A lower proportion of IP active firms indicated that opportunities were about the same (29% vs 37% of non-IP active firms). Companies who were IP active were more likely to state that the economic downturn had offered their company reduced opportunities (36% vs 29%). Table 166: Whether economic downturn has offered increased or reduced opportunities by IP activity

| IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | IP active | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Increased opportunities | 32% | 30% | 39% | 24% | 31% | 35% | 19% | 33% | | About the same/no impact | 29% | 29% | 23% | 29% | 35% | 32% | 38% | 27% | | Reduced opportunities | 36% | 37% | 36% | 41% | 31% | 31% | 32% | 41% | | Don’t know | 3% | 4% | 2% | 6% | 4% | 2% | 11% | 0% |

| Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Increased opportunities | 32% | 41% | 28% | 50% | 9% | 26% | 38% | 24% | | About the same/no impact | 37% | 29% | 40% | 50% | 27% | 41% | 33% | 40% | | Reduced opportunities | 29% | 27% | 30% | 0% | 64% | 29% | 24% | 36% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 5% | 0% |

UKTI users and non-UKTI users were equally likely to report increased opportunities, reduced opportunities and no impact on their company from the economic downturn.

Table 167: Whether economic downturn has offered increased or reduced opportunities by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Increased opportunities | 32% | 40% | 31% | 33% | 21% | 32% | 24% | 30% | | About the same/no impact | 33% | 27% | 32% | 33% | 38% | 37% | 39% | 30% | | Reduced opportunities | 32% | 29% | 35% | 33% | 38% | 27% | 26% | 40% | | Don’t know | 3% | 4% | 2% | 0% | 4% | 3% | 11% | 0% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Increased opportunities | 31% | 31% | 34% | 33% | 31% | 24% | 33% | 33% | | About the same/no impact | 34% | 32% | 38% | 44% | 23% | 36% | 25% | 25% | | Reduced opportunities | 33% | 36% | 27% | 11% | 46% | 40% | 42% | 42% | | Don’t know | 2% | 2% | 2% | 11% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

9.3 Impact of the Decline in the Value of Sterling

All respondents were asked a series of questions about pricing and currency and the impact on their business of currency fluctuations.

Firstly companies were asked about the effect of the recent decline in the value of sterling and whether their company would be able to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling. All respondents were asked to indicate whether they expected to increase their sales in any market as a result of the decline in the value of sterling. Following on from this, respondents who said yes were asked whether it has been necessary or would be necessary to discount products or services to achieve an increase in sales in any market. Almost two thirds (64%) of companies felt they would be able to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling. Companies aged over 5 years were more likely to feel that they would be able to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling than younger companies.

Table 168: Ability to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 64% | 58% | 62% | 70% | 69% | | No | 32% | 38% | 35% | 24% | 27% | | Don’t know | 5% | 3% | 3% | 7% | 5% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding whether or not they would be able to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling. Companies defined as IP active were more likely to indicate that they would be able to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling than non-IP active companies (69% and 59% respectively).

Table 169: Ability to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 69% | 67% | 64% | 69% | 75% | | No | 25% | 29% | 36% | 23% | 21% | | Don’t know | 6% | 4% | 0% | 12% | 8% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 59% | 51% | 61% | 50% | 63% | | No | 38% | 46% | 35% | 50% | 33% | | Don’t know | 3% | 3% | 4% | 0% | 4% |

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding whether or not they would be able to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling. UKTI users were more likely to feel that they could take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling compared to non-UKTI users. Table 170: Ability to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | Yes | 68% | 66% | 67% | 72% | 63% | 74% | 70% | 65% | | | | No | 26% | 32% | 30% | 17% | 29% | 21% | 22% | 24% | | | | Don’t know | 5% | 2% | 3% | 11% | 8% | 5% | 9% | 11% | | | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | Yes | 54% | 49% | 55% | 56% | 85% | 50% | 50% | 67% | | | | No | 43% | 47% | 42% | 44% | 15% | 48% | 42% | 33% | | | | Don’t know | 3% | 5% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 8% | 0% | | |

All those currently exporting were asked to indicate whether they have increased or expected to increase their sales in any market as a result of the decline in the value of sterling.

Most companies (64%) had not increased, and did not expect to increase, their sales in any market as a result of the decline in the value of sterling.

Table 171: Effect of the decline in the value of sterling on sales

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | Yes | 31% | 30% | 29% | 41% | 32% | 35% | 29% | 30% | | | No | 64% | 66% | 68% | 56% | 62% | 61% | 67% | 60% | | | Don’t know | 5% | 4% | 4% | 4% | 5% | 4% | 3% | 10% | |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding whether or not they would be able to increase their sales in overseas markets as a result of the decline in the value of sterling. Around a third (34%) of IP active companies felt that they would increase their sales in overseas markets as a result of the decline in the value of sterling in comparison to just under three in ten (28%) non-IP active companies.

Table 172: Effect of the decline in the value of sterling on sales by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | Yes | 34% | 34% | 31% | 41% | 38% | 37% | 30% | 35% | | | | No | 60% | 60% | 67% | 53% | 54% | 58% | 68% | 53% | | | | Don’t know | 6% | 7% | 2% | 6% | 8% | 5% | 3% | 12% | | | | Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | Yes | 28% | 27% | 27% | 40% | 18% | 33% | 29% | 12% | | | | No | 69% | 71% | 69% | 60% | 82% | 65% | 67% | 84% | | | | Don’t know | 3% | 2% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 5% | 4% | | | There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding whether or not they would be able to increase their sales in overseas markets as a result of the decline in the value of sterling. A third (33%) of UKTI users felt that they would increase their sales in overseas markets as a result of the decline in the value of sterling, in comparison to just under three in ten (26%) non-UKTI users.

Table 173: Effect of the decline in the value of sterling on sales by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UKTI users | Yes | 33% | 35% | 30% | 44% | 33% | 37% | 28% | 30% | | | No | 61% | 59% | 65% | 50% | 63% | 60% | 67% | 58% | | | Don’t know | 6% | 6% | 5% | 6% | 4% | 3% | 4% | 11% | | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Yes | 26% | 24% | 26% | 33% | 31% | 29% | 33% | 25% | | | No | 72% | 75% | 72% | 67% | 62% | 67% | 67% | 75% | | | Don’t know | 2% | 1% | 2% | 0% | 8% | 5% | 0% | 0% |

All respondents who expected to increase their sales as a result of the decline in the value of sterling were asked whether it was necessary to discount their products and services in order to increase their sales. For most this was not a consideration.

Table 174: Discounting products or services to increase sales in any market

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 283 | 71 | 71 | 11 | 12 | 69 | 17 | 32 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | | Yes | 25% | 27% | 24% | 27% | 17% | 29% | 18% | 22% | | | No | 75% | 73% | 76% | 73% | 83% | 70% | 82% | 78% | | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% |

For both IP active and non-IP active companies, only a minority (25%) would have to discount their products or services to increase sales. Table 175: Discounting products or services to increase sales in any market by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 157 | 36 | 28 | 7 | 10 | 36 | 11 | 29 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 25% | 31% | 18% | 29% | 20% | 31% | 18% | 24% | | No | 74% | 69% | 82% | 71% | 80% | 67% | 82% | 76% | | Don’t know| 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 0% |

| Non-IP active | Base | 126 | 35 | 43 | 4 | 33 | 6 | 3 | |---------------|------|-----|----|----|---|----|---|---| | | 100% | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Yes | 25% | 23% | 28% | 25% | 0% | 27% | 17% | 0% | | No | 75% | 77% | 72% | 75% | 100%| 73% | 83% | 100%| | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% |

For both UKTI users and non-UKTI users, only a minority (24% vs 28%) had had to discount their products or services to increase sales.

Table 176: Discounting products or services to increase sales in any market by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 207 | 47 | 45 | 8 | 8 | 57 | 13 | 29 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 24% | 23% | 20% | 25% | 25% | 32% | 15% | 21% | | No | 75% | 77% | 80% | 75% | 75% | 67% | 85% | 79% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 76 | 24 | 26 | 3 | 4 | 12 | 4 | 3 | |----------------|------|----|----|----|---|---|----|---|---| | | 100% | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Yes | 28% | 33% | 31% | 33% | 0% | 17% | 25% | 33% | | No | 72% | 67% | 69% | 67% | 100%| 83% | 75% | 67% |

9.4 Usage of Currencies

All respondents were asked to indicate when they were operating in overseas markets whether they priced their products or services in sterling, overseas currencies or both.

A higher proportion of younger companies and smaller companies priced their products or services exclusively in sterling when trading overseas. However, the majority of firms (55%) reported pricing in both sterling and overseas currencies. Usage of this mixture of currencies was most popular among firms which had been established for at least 10 years. Table 177: Currency usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Sterling | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Overseas | | 29% | 36% | 36% | 22% | 8% | 28% | | Both | | 55% | 45% | 44% | 73% | 63% | 71% | | Don’t know | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 2% | | Not applicable | | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

IP active companies were more likely to price their products and services in both sterling and overseas currencies, with the propensity to do this increasing for older companies.

Table 178: Currency usage by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Sterling | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Overseas | | 22% | 34% | 27% | 18% | 8% | 22% | 8% | 14% | | Both | | 63% | 46% | 51% | 41% | 81% | 70% | 76% | 82% | | Don’t know | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Not applicable | | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

Non-IP active

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Sterling | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Overseas | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Both | | 35% | 37% | 41% | 30% | 9% | 33% | 19% | 20% | | Don’t know | | 17% | 18% | 19% | 10% | 36% | 11% | 14% | 16% | | Not applicable | | 48% | 44% | 40% | 60% | 55% | 56% | 62% | 64% |

UKTI users were more likely to price in both sterling and overseas currencies than non-UKTI users. This is consistent with UKTI users in the survey sample operating in more overseas markets and more world regions than non-users. Table 179: Currency usage by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Sterling | | 27% | 34% | 32% | 28% | 0% | 29% | 15% | 17% | | Overseas Currencies | | 13% | 14% | 21% | 17% | 13% | 9% | 15% | 5% | | Both | | 60% | 51% | 47% | 50% | 88% | 62% | 67% | 78% | | Don’t know | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | | Not applicable as no overseas sales in the last year | | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Sterling | | 32% | 38% | 41% | 11% | 23% | 24% | 0% | 8% | | Overseas Currencies | | 21% | 24% | 19% | 44% | 31% | 12% | 17% | 17% | | Both | | 46% | 37% | 41% | 44% | 46% | 64% | 83% | 75% | | Not applicable as no overseas sales in the last year | | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

9.5 Effect of the decline in Sterling on costs

All companies were asked whether, taking account of imports, the recent decline in the value of sterling has raised the costs of conducting business overseas for their firm.

For almost six in ten companies (56%) the recent decline in the value of sterling has raised the cost of conducting business overseas either ‘moderately’ or ‘a lot’.

Table 180: Effect on costs of the recent decline in the value of sterling

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | No | | 21% | 24% | 24% | 15% | 3% | 19% | 19% | 18% | | Not significantly | | 7% | 7% | 7% | 11% | 3% | 6% | 9% | 10% | | A little | | 13% | 11% | 13% | 11% | 8% | 16% | 10% | 12% | | Moderately | | 27% | 31% | 23% | 30% | 38% | 24% | 34% | 25% | | A lot | | 29% | 25% | 30% | 26% | 43% | 31% | 26% | 26% | | Don’t know | | 3% | 1% | 3% | 7% | 5% | 3% | 2% | 9% |

IP and non-IP active companies were equally likely to feel that the recent decline in the value of sterling had raised the cost of conducting business overseas either moderately or a lot. Table 181: Effect on costs of the recent decline in the value of sterling

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | No | | 18% | 21% | 22% | 18% | 4% | 19% | 11% | 13% | | Not significantly | | 8% | 9% | 6% | 18% | 4% | 6% | 8% | 12% | | A little | | 14% | 13% | 16% | 6% | 12% | 18% | 14% | 11% | | Moderately | | 29% | 29% | 27% | 29% | 35% | 32% | 32% | 24% | | A lot | | 27% | 25% | 28% | 18% | 42% | 23% | 32% | 30% | | Don’t know | | 4% | 2% | 2% | 12% | 4% | 3% | 3% | 10% | | Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | No | | 24% | 26% | 26% | 10% | 0% | 20% | 33% | 32% | | Not significantly | | 6% | 5% | 8% | 0% | 0% | 5% | 10% | 4% | | A little | | 11% | 9% | 11% | 20% | 0% | 15% | 5% | 16% | | Moderately | | 26% | 33% | 21% | 30% | 45% | 17% | 38% | 28% | | A lot | | 30% | 26% | 31% | 40% | 45% | 39% | 14% | 12% | | Don’t know | | 3% | 1% | 3% | 0% | 9% | 3% | 0% | 8% |

UKTI users were only slightly more likely than non-UKTI users to feel that the recent decline in the value of sterling has raised the cost of conducting business overseas either moderately or a lot (58% vs 53%).

Table 182: Effect on costs of the recent decline in the value of sterling by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | No | | 20% | 24% | 22% | 17% | 0% | 19% | 20% | 18% | | Not significantly | | 8% | 8% | 7% | 11% | 4% | 6% | 9% | 10% | | A little | | 11% | 10% | 13% | 11% | 0% | 16% | 7% | 10% | | Moderately | | 29% | 33% | 26% | 28% | 46% | 26% | 37% | 25% | | A lot | | 29% | 24% | 30% | 28% | 46% | 30% | 26% | 27% | | Don’t Know | | 4% | 1% | 3% | 6% | 4% | 3% | 2% | 9% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | No | | 23% | 24% | 28% | 11% | 8% | 19% | 17% | 17% | | Not significantly | | 6% | 6% | 7% | 11% | 0% | 5% | 8% | 8% | | A little | | 15% | 13% | 13% | 11% | 23% | 19% | 25% | 25% | | Moderately | | 24% | 29% | 20% | 33% | 23% | 19% | 25% | 25% | | A lot | | 29% | 27% | 30% | 22% | 38% | 36% | 25% | 17% | | Don’t Know | | 3% | 2% | 3% | 11% | 8% | 2% | 0% | 8% |

9.6 Overall effect of the decline in the value of sterling

All companies were asked what the effect had been of the decline in the value of sterling on their business. Just over four in ten companies (41%) felt that the decline in the value of sterling had had a negative effect on their business. Firms established for less than 5 years were most likely to indicate that the effect had been negative. Just under one third of respondents (30%) indicated that the decline in sterling had been beneficial to their business.

Table 183: Overall effect of the recent decline in the value of sterling

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Been beneficial to your business | 30% | 26% | 32% | 37% | 24% | 33% | 28% | 29% | | Had no effect | 26% | 25% | 24% | 26% | 38% | 27% | 29% | 26% | | Had a negative effect on your business | 41% | 47% | 43% | 37% | 32% | 36% | 36% | 41% | | Had positive effects on some aspects of business, negative on others | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 2% | 3% | | Too early to tell | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 2% | | Other | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 5% | 0% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding whether the decline in the value of sterling has had a negative effect on their business. IP active companies were less likely than non-IP active companies to state that the decline in the value of sterling has had a negative effect on their business. Conversely, they were also more likely to indicate that the decline in the value of sterling had been beneficial to their business.

Table 184: Overall effect of the recent decline in the value of sterling on businesses by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Been beneficial to your business | 33% | 32% | 36% | 35% | 23% | 35% | 30% | 33% | | Had no effect | 27% | 29% | 23% | 24% | 38% | 30% | 22% | 24% | | Had a negative effect on your business | 37% | 38% | 39% | 41% | 31% | 30% | 43% | 39% | | Had positive effects on some aspects of business, negative on others | 2% | 1% | 2% | 0% | 4% | 1% | 3% | 2% | | Too early to tell | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 2% | | Other | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 3% | 0% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Been beneficial to your business | 27% | 22% | 30% | 40% | 27% | 31% | 24% | 16% | | Had a negative effect on your business | 46% | 53% | 46% | 30% | 36% | 42% | 24% | 48% | | Had no effect | 25% | 22% | 24% | 30% | 36% | 24% | 43% | 32% | | Had positive effects on some aspects of business, negative on others | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 4% | | Too early to tell | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 10% | 0% | | Other | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 10% | 0% |

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding whether the decline in the value of sterling has had a negative effect on their business. UKTI users were less likely than non-UKTI users to state that the effect of the decline in the value of sterling had been negative for their business. They were also more likely to indicate that the effect had been positive (32% vs 24%)

Table 185: Overall effect of the recent decline in the value of sterling on businesses by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Been beneficial to your business | 32% | 30% | 39% | 33% | 21% | 35% | 28% | 26% | | Had no effect | 26% | 21% | 25% | 33% | 42% | 27% | 33% | 27% | | Had a negative effect on your business | 38% | 47% | 35% | 33% | 38% | 33% | 30% | 43% | | Had positive effects on some aspects of business, negative on others | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 2% | 2% | | Too early to tell | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 2% | | Other | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 7% | 0% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | |----------------|------|-----|-----|-----|---|----|----|----|----| | | | 100%| 100%| 100%|100%|100%|100%|100%|100%| | Been beneficial to your business | 24% | 21% | 22% | 44% | 31% | 26% | 25% | 50% | | Had no effect | 25% | 31% | 22% | 11% | 31% | 26% | 17% | 17% | | Had a negative effect on your business | 48% | 47% | 55% | 44% | 23% | 48% | 58% | 25% | | Had positive effects on some aspects of business, negative on others | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 8% | 0% | 0% | 8% | | Too early to tell | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 8% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Other | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

9.7 Export Credit Insurance

All companies were asked whether they either currently used or would use export credit insurance. Those who did use export credit insurance were asked whether they had experienced any difficulties in accessing export credit insurance in the last six months.

Export credit insurance was used by one in five companies (21%). It was most likely to be used by older companies and larger companies. These results are consistent with those from PIMS. Over 3 waves of the quarterly survey of UKTI PIMS trade clients, (Jan/Feb - Jul/Aug 2009) 73% of respondents indicated that they did not use export credit insurance.

Table 186: Use of export credit insurance

| Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 21% | 20% | 12% | 19% | 41% | 17% | 29% | 42% | | No | 73% | 74% | 84% | 78% | 51% | 80% | 62% | 47% | | Don’t know | 6% | 6% | 5% | 4% | 8% | 4% | 9% | 11% | There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their use of export credit insurance. IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to use export credit insurance.

Table 187: Use of export credit insurance by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 28% | 26% | 17% | 24% | | No | 64% | 65% | 77% | 71% | | Don’t know| 8% | 8% | 7% | 6% |

| Non-IP active | Base | | | | | | 454 | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 14% | 16% | 9% | 10% | | No | 82% | 81% | 87% | 90% | | Don’t know | 4% | 4% | 4% | 0% |

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding their use of export credit insurance. Users of UKTI were more likely to use export credit insurance than non-UKTI users (24% vs 15%).

Table 188: Use of export credit insurance by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 24% | 24% | 12% | 22% | | No | 71% | 71% | 86% | 72% | | Don’t know | 5% | 5% | 1% | 6% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | | | | | | 290 | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 15% | 16% | 11% | 11% | | No | 77% | 77% | 79% | 89% | | Don’t know | 8% | 7% | 10% | 0% |

As a comparison the following table reports data from the UKTI PIMS non-user surveys of 2008 and 2009 which illustrates that the findings are consistent between surveys.

Table 189: Comparison of Use of export credit insurance by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 14-16 and the PIMS non-user survey of 2009

| Total | UKTI non-users | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 14-16 | |-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------| | UKTI users | Base | 290 | 621 | 291 | 2548 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 15% | 24% | 11% | 16% | | No | 77% | 71% | 85% | 73% | | Don’t know | 8% | 5% | 4% | 11% | Fewer than one in ten companies (9%) reported difficulties in accessing export credit insurance over the last 6 months, most typically this was reported by larger companies. This is somewhat higher than indicated by UKTI PIMS 14-16 in which 4% of UKTI users indicated that they had had difficulties and with the UKTI 2009 non-user survey which found that 3% of respondents had experienced difficulties.

Table 190: Difficulties in accessing export credit insurance

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Yes | 9% | 7% | 5% | 7% | 19% | 4% | 16% | 25% | | No | 11% | 11% | 6% | 11% | 19% | 13% | 12% | 16% | | Do not use export credit insurance | 79% | 81% | 88% | 81% | 59% | 83% | 71% | 58% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 2% | 1% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their reported difficulties in accessing export credit insurance. IP active companies were more likely than non-IP active companies to use export credit insurance and to have more difficulties accessing it.

Table 191: Difficulties in accessing export credit insurance by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Yes | 14% | 9% | 10% | 12% | 15% | 6% | 22% | 30% | | No | 13% | 14% | 7% | 12% | 19% | 15% | 14% | 16% | | Do not use export credit insurance | 72% | 76% | 83% | 76% | 62% | 78% | 65% | 53% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 1% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Yes | 4% | 5% | 3% | 0% | 27% | 2% | 5% | 8% | | No | 9% | 9% | 6% | 10% | 18% | 10% | 10% | 16% | | Do not use export credit insurance | 87% | 85% | 91% | 90% | 55% | 88% | 81% | 76% | | Don’t know | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 5% | 0% |

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding their reported difficulties in accessing export credit insurance. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to use export credit insurance and to have difficulties accessing it, especially larger companies. Table 192: Difficulties in accessing export credit insurance by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 12% | 10% | 7% | 11% | 17% | | No | 12% | 12% | 5% | 11% | 17% | | Do not use export credit insurance | 76% | 77% | 88% | 78% | 67% | | Don’t know | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | |----------------|------|-----|-----|-----|---|----|----|----|----| | | | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Yes | 3% | 3% | 3% | 0% | 23%| 0% | 0% | 8% | 8% | | No | 10% | 10% | 8% | 11% | 23%| 7% | 8% | 17% | 17% | | Do not use export credit insurance | 86% | 86% | 89% | 89% | 46%| 93% | 83% | 67% | 67% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 8% | 0% | 8% | 8% | 8% |

However, the proportion of UKTI users experiencing difficulties is considerably higher than that reported through the UKTI PIMS surveys of 2,548 users of UKTI services (4%). This difference may have arisen due to the higher levels of export experience in this 2009 survey sample. Analysis of the PIMS survey data by years export experience showed firms which had exported for longer were more likely to have experienced difficulties.

Table 193: Comparison of Difficulties in accessing export credit insurance by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 14-16 and the PIMS non-user survey of 2009

| UKTI users | Total | UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 14-16 | |------------|-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------| | Base | 290 | 621 | 291 | 2548 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 3% | 12% | 3% | 4% | | No | 10% | 12% | 8% | 11% | | Do not use export credit insurance | 86% | 76% | 85% | 73% | | Don’t know/refused | 1% | 0% | 4% | 12% |

9.8 Letters of Credit

All companies were asked whether they either currently used or would use letters of credit when doing business overseas. For those who said that they did use letters of credit and were currently exporting, they were asked whether they had experienced any difficulties in accessing letters of credit or with the terms and conditions relating to the letters of credit in the last six months.

Just under half of the companies had used letters of credit, with firms with more than 50 employees more likely to use letters of credit when conducting business overseas.

A high proportion of firms in the survey sample (48%) reported using letters of credit compared to the 291 respondents to the UKTI PIMS non-user survey of 2009 and 1,698 users of UKTI services surveyed in 2009 of whom 24% and 28% reported using letters of credit respectively. This disparity may be related to the bias in this survey sample towards firms in many markets and world regions.

Table 194: Use of letters of credit

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 48% | 39% | 34% | 63% | 50% | 60% | 73% | | No | 50% | 59% | 65% | 37% | 47% | 36% | 24% | | Don’t know | 3% | 2% | 2% | 0% | 3% | 3% | 3% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies in terms of whether they used letters of credit. IP active companies were more likely to use letters of credit when conducting business overseas, especially those with over 50 employees.

Table 195: Use of letters of credit by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 57% | 50% | 38% | 71% | 49% | 70% | 80% | | No | 41% | 48% | 60% | 29% | 47% | 30% | 18% | | Don’t know | 2% | 2% | 2% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 2% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 38% | 29% | 31% | 50% | 51% | 43% | 52% | | No | 59% | 68% | 67% | 50% | 46% | 48% | 44% | | Don’t know | 3% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 10% | 4% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users in terms of whether they used letters of credit. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to use letters of credit when conducting business overseas, especially those with over 50 employees.

Table 196: Use of letters of credit by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | UKTI users | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 53% | 47% | 35% | 72% | 52% | 65% | 76% | | No | 45% | 53% | 64% | 28% | 45% | 33% | 22% | | Don’t know | 2% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 2% | 2% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Non-UKTI users | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 36% | 29% | 32% | 44% | 43% | 42% | 50% | | No | 61% | 67% | 65% | 56% | 55% | 50% | 42% | | Don’t know | 3% | 4% | 3% | 0% | 2% | 8% | 8% | Most typically, companies who accessed letters of credit did not have any problems either accessing them or with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit.

Table 197: Difficulties with letters of credit

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes - difficulty accessing the letters of credit | 3% | 3% | 3% | 7% | 3% | 3% | 5% | 2% | | Yes - difficulty with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit | 4% | 3% | 3% | 4% | 5% | 5% | 5% | 6% | | Yes - both | 2% | 1% | 2% | 4% | 5% | 3% | 2% | 2% | | No | 37% | 31% | 25% | 48% | 65% | 38% | 48% | 58% | | Do not use letters of credit | 53% | 62% | 66% | 37% | 22% | 50% | 40% | 28% | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 4% |

IP active companies were more likely to access letters of credit. Most typically companies did not have any problems either accessing letters of credit or with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit whether IP active or not.

Table 198: Difficulties with letters of credit by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes - difficulty accessing the letters of credit | 4% | 6% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 8% | 2% | | Yes - difficulty with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit | 5% | 2% | 4% | 6% | 4% | 7% | 8% | 7% | | Yes - both | 3% | 1% | 3% | 6% | 4% | 4% | 3% | 2% | | No | 44% | 41% | 24% | 59% | 77% | 33% | 51% | 63% | | Do not use letters of credit | 43% | 50% | 62% | 29% | 15% | 51% | 30% | 22% | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 4% | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes - difficulty accessing the letters of credit | 2% | 2% | 3% | 20% | 9% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | Yes - difficulty with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit | 3% | 4% | 3% | 0% | 9% | 3% | 0% | 4% | | Yes - both | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 9% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | No | 31% | 22% | 26% | 30% | 36% | 43% | 43% | 44% | | Do not use letters of credit | 62% | 71% | 69% | 50% | 36% | 49% | 57% | 48% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 4% |

Most typically, companies did not have any problems either accessing letters of credit or with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit whether UKTI users or not. Table 199: Difficulties with letters of credit by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|------|--------|--------|------| | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes - difficulty accessing the letters of credit | 4% | 4% | 3% | 11% | 4% | 3% | 4% | 2% | | | | Yes - difficulty with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit | 5% | 4% | 3% | 6% | 8% | 4% | 7% | 6% | | | | Yes - both | 2% | 1% | 1% | 6% | 0% | 3% | 2% | 1% | | | | No | 42% | 36% | 28% | 50% | 67% | 41% | 52% | 61% | | | | Do not use letters of credit | 47% | 53% | 65% | 28% | 21% | 48% | 35% | 25% | | | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 4% | | |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | |----------------|------|-----|-----|-----|---|----|----|----|----| | | 100% | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | Yes - difficulty accessing the letters of credit | 2% | 2% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 8% | 0% | 0% | | Yes - difficulty with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit | 3% | 1% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 10% | 0% | 8% | 0% | | Yes - both | 2% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 15%| 2% | 0% | 8% | 0% | | No | 27% | 24% | 22% | 44% | 62%| 29% | 33% | 33% | 33% | | Do not use letters of credit | 65% | 73% | 68% | 56% | 23%| 57% | 58% | 50% | 50% | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

However, a higher proportion of firms indicated that they had experienced difficulties than PIMS evidence suggests.

Table 200: Comparison of difficulties with letters of credit by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 14-16 and the PIMS non-user survey of 2009

| Total | UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 14-16 | |-------|----------------|------------|----------------------|------------------| | UKTI users | Base | 290 | 621 | 291 | 2548 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes - difficulty accessing the letters of credit | 2% | 4% | 1% | 0% | | Yes - difficulty with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit | 3% | 5% | 1% | 1% | | Yes - both | 2% | 2% | 1% | 2% | | No | 27% | 42% | 21% | 24% | | Do not use letters of credit | 65% | 47% | 76% | 64% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 0% | 8% |

9.9 Accessing Finance

All companies were asked whether over the past 6 months their company had attempted to access finance either from within the company or from external sources. Those who had, were asked whether their business had any difficulties in accessing finance, either from within the company or from external sources. If they responded ‘Yes’ to this they were then asked whether these difficulties related to accessing internal finance from within the business or, raising finance from external sources such as a bank. For those who had experienced difficulties relating to accessing finance they were asked whether any of these difficulties specifically related to financing their overseas business activity. If these difficulties related to overseas sales they were further asked whether these difficulties accessing finance had had any negative impact on the value of their overseas sales over the last 6 months. However, if they responded ‘no’ or ‘don’t know’ ie the difficulties did not specifically relate to financing their overseas business activity they were instead asked, ‘Although they did not specifically relate to financing your overseas business, would you say that these difficulties accessing finance had any negative impact on the value of your overseas sales over the last 6 months”.

The majority of companies (64%) had not attempted to access either internal or external finance over the last six months. Those most likely to have accessed internal or external finance were younger companies and companies with 100 or more employees.

Table 201: Attempts to access finance

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 30% | 36% | 31% | 33% | 35% | 23% | 22% | 31% | | No | 64% | 61% | 67% | 63% | 54% | 73% | 62% | 53% | | Don’t know | 6% | 3% | 2% | 4% | 11% | 4% | 16% | 17% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their attempts to access finance. IP active companies were more likely to have attempted to access finance than non-IP active companies (34% vs 26%).

Table 202: Attempts to access finance by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 34% | 36% | 41% | 35% | 35% | 28% | 30% | 34% | | No | 58% | 58% | 57% | 59% | 65% | 68% | 51% | 49% | | Don’t know | 8% | 7% | 2% | 6% | 0% | 4% | 19% | 17% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 26% | 36% | 25% | 30% | 36% | 19% | 10% | 20% | | No | 70% | 64% | 73% | 70% | 27% | 78% | 81% | 64% | | Don’t know | 4% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 36% | 3% | 10% | 16% |

Similar proportions of UKTI users (31%) and non-UKTI users (28%) had accessed finance. Firms established up to 5 years ago were most likely to have attempted to access finance. Table 203: Attempts to access finance by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Yes | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | No | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Don’t know | | | 31% | 39% | 29% | 27% | 24% | 30% | | | | | 62% | 56% | 54% | 70% | 61% | 52% | | | | | 7% | 5% | 17% | 3% | 15% | 18% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Yes | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | No | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Don’t know | | | 28% | 32% | 46% | 12% | 17% | 33% | | | | | 68% | 65% | 54% | 83% | 67% | 58% | | | | | 3% | 0% | 0% | 5% | 17% | 8% |

Difficulty in accessing finance was more likely to be reported by the youngest companies, with one in five (20%) reporting such difficulties. This result is likely to be driven by this group being more likely to have attempted to access finance.

Table 204: Difficulties in accessing finance

| Total | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Yes | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | No | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Did not attempt to access finance | 70% | 64% | 69% | 67% | 65% | 77% | 78% | 69% | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 1% | | Refused | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

Whilst IP active firms were more likely to have attempted to access finance than non-IP active firms, similar proportions indicated that they had experienced difficulties.

Table 205: Difficulties in accessing finance by IP activity

| Total | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Yes | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | No | | 16% | 22% | 22% | 0% | 12% | 12% | 19% | | Did not attempt to access finance | 66% | 64% | 59% | 65% | 65% | 72% | 70% | 66% | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 1% | | Refused | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

| Non-IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Yes | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | No | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Did not attempt to access finance | 13% | 18% | 13% | 10% | 9% | 6% | 5% | 16% | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | Similar proportions of both UKTI users and non-UKTI users (15% and 12% respectively) had experienced difficulties accessing finance.

Table 206: Difficulties in accessing finance by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Base | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 15% | 20% | 19% | 6% | 13% | 11% | 15% | 13% | | No | 15% | 19% | 10% | 28% | 13% | 15% | 9% | 17% | | Did not attempt to access finance | 69% | 61% | 69% | 67% | 71% | 73% | 76% | 70% | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 1% | | Refused | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

| | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Non-UKTI users | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 12% | 20% | 13% | 0% | 8% | 2% | 8% | 0% | | No | 14% | 12% | 15% | 33% | 31% | 7% | 8% | 33% | | Did not attempt to access finance | 72% | 68% | 70% | 67% | 54% | 88% | 83% | 67% | | Don’t know | 1% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 8% | 2% | 0% | 0% |

The proportion of UKTI users reporting difficulties was lower than that in PIMS 14 and 15 surveys of UKTI trade clients, in which 22% reported difficulties compared to just 12% in this survey.

Table 207: Comparison of difficulties in accessing finance by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 14-15 and PIMS non-user survey of 2009

| | Total | UKTI non-users | UKTI users | PIMS non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 14-15 | |------------------|-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------| | | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 1961 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UKTI users | | | | | | | Yes | 12% | 15% | 17% | 17% | 22% | | No | 14% | 15% | 80% | 80% | 72% | | Did not attempt to access finance | 72% | 69% | 0% | 0% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 2% | 2% | 6% |

For the minority of companies who indicated that they had experienced problems accessing finance this more typically related to external finance rather than internal finance, especially for younger companies. Table 208: Difficulties in accessing internal or external finance either from within the company or from external sources

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Internal finance | | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 3% | 0% | 0% | | External finance | | 11% | 16% | 13% | 4% | 3% | 8% | 14% | | Both | | 2% | 1% | 2% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 0% | | Did not experience difficulties | 86% | 80% | 84% | 96% | 89% | 91% | 86% | 89% | | Don’t know | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Refused | | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

Both IP active and non-IP active companies were equally likely (12% and 10% respectively) to have experienced problems accessing external finance rather than internal finance.

Table 209: Difficulties in accessing internal or external finance either from within the company or from external sources by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Internal finance | | 1% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 0% | | External finance | | 12% | 15% | 18% | 0% | 0% | 11% | 19% | | Both | | 2% | 3% | 3% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 0% | | Did not experience difficulties | 84% | 78% | 78% | 100% | 88% | 88% | 81% | 90% | | Don’t know | | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 1% | 0% | | Refused | | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

Both UKTI users and non-users were equally likely (12% and 10% respectively) to have experienced problems accessing external finance, with around one in ten indicating this. Table 210: Difficulties in accessing internal or external finance either from within the company or from external sources by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | UKTI users | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Internal finance | | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 1% | | External finance | | 12% | 16% | 16% | 6% | 0% | 10% | 15% | 7% | | Both | | 2% | 1% | 2% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 4% | | Did not experience difficulties | | 85% | 80% | 81% | 94% | 88% | 89% | 85% | 88% | | Don’t know | | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Internal finance | | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | External finance | | 10% | 17% | 9% | 0% | 8% | 0% | 8% | 0% | | Both | | 1% | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | Did not experience difficulties | | 88% | 80% | 87% | 100% | 92% | 98% | 92% | 100% | | Refused | | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |

However, the above proportions are lower than reported in PIMS 14 and 15 surveys of users of UKTI services (17%) and a 2009 survey of non-users (13%).

Table 211: Comparison of difficulties in accessing finance by UKTI usage with client profiles from PIMS 14-15 and PIMS non-user survey of 2009

| | Total | UKTI Non-users | UKTI users | PIMS Non-users 2009 | Users PIMS 14-15 | |----------------------|-------|----------------|------------|---------------------|------------------| | | Base | 290 | 621 | 300 | 1961 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Internal finance | | 1% | 1% | 1% | 2% | | External finance | | 10% | 12% | 13% | 17% | | Both | | 1% | 2% | 3% | 3% | | Did not experience difficulties | | 88% | 85% | 80% | 72% | | Don’t know | | 0% | 0% | 2% | 6% |

Companies were asked to indicate whether any of these difficulties specifically related to financing their overseas business activity.

Although only a minority of companies experienced difficulties accessing finance for overseas business activity, this was more prevalent among younger companies. Please note that a proportion of respondents were not asked this question who should have been. They are classified in this table as ‘Not asked the question’. Table 212: Difficulties in accessing finance related to overseas business activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes, related to overseas sales | 5% | 9% | 5% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 3% | 3% | 2% | | No | 4% | 5% | 8% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 1% | 3% | 2% | | Did not experience difficulties | 86% | 81% | 84% | 96% | 92% | | | | | 91% | 86% | 89% | | Not asked the question | 5% | 5% | 3% | 4% | 8% | | | | | 5% | 7% | 7% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their reported difficulties in accessing finance for overseas business. IP active companies were more likely to have experienced difficulties accessing finance for overseas business activity than non-IP active companies. This was driven in part by the higher proportion of firms which had experienced difficulties in accessing finance.

Table 213: Difficulties in accessing finance related to overseas business activity by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes, related to overseas sales | 7% | 9% | 12% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 6% | 5% | 2% | | No | 4% | 6% | 8% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 1% | 5% | 1% | | Did not experience difficulties | 84% | 79% | 78% | 100% | 92% | | | | | 89% | 81% | 90% | | Not asked the question | 5% | 7% | 2% | 0% | 8% | | | | | 4% | 8% | 6% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | | | | | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes, related to overseas sales | 3% | 9% | 1% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 0% | 0% | 0% | | No | 5% | 5% | 8% | 0% | 0% | | | | | 1% | 0% | 4% | | Did not experience difficulties | 88% | 82% | 87% | 90% | 91% | | | | | 94% | 95% | 84% | | Not asked the question | 5% | 4% | 4% | 10% | 9% | | | | | 5% | 5% | 12% |

UKTI users and non-UKTI users were as likely to have experienced difficulties accessing finance for overseas business activity. Table 214: Whether difficulties in accessing finance related to financing companies overseas business activity by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | | | | | | | | | | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes, related to overseas sales | | | | | | | | | | | 4% | 9% | 3% | 0% | 0% | 4% | 4% | 2% | | No | 5% | 5% | 10% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 4% | 2% | | Did not experience difficulties | | | | | | | | | | | 85% | 81% | 81% | 94% | 92% | 90% | 85% | 88% | | Not asked the question | | | | | | | | | | | 6% | 5% | 5% | 6% | 8% | 5% | 7% | 8% | | Non-UKTI users | Base | | | | | | | | | | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes, related to overseas sales | | | | | | | | | | | 6% | 10% | 7% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | No | 3% | 5% | 5% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Did not experience difficulties | | | | | | | | | | | 88% | 80% | 88% | 100% | 92% | 98% | 92% | 100% | | Not asked the question | | | | | | | | | | | 3% | 5% | 0% | 0% | 8% | 2% | 8% | 0% |

Companies were equally likely to report that these difficulties in accessing finance had a negative impact on the value of their overseas sales.

Table 215: Whether difficulties in accessing finance had any negative impact on the value of overseas sales

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | Base | | | | | | | | | | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 7% | 9% | 9% | 0% | 5% | 5% | 10% | 6% | | No | 6% | 10% | 6% | 4% | 5% | 4% | 3% | 5% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Did not experience difficulties | | | | | | | | | | | 86% | 81% | 84% | 96% | 89% | 91% | 86% | 89% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding whether their reported difficulties in accessing finance had a negative impact on the value of their overseas sales. IP active companies were more likely to indicate that difficulties in accessing finance had a negative impact on the value of their overseas sales. Table 216: Whether difficulties in accessing finance had any negative impact on the value of overseas sales by IP activity

| IP active | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 10% | 11% | 17% | 0% | 8% | 8% | 14% | 6% | | No | 5% | 10% | 4% | 0% | 4% | 3% | 5% | 4% | | Don’t know| 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Did not experience difficulties | 84% | 79% | 78% | 100% | 88% | 89% | 81% | 90% |

| Non-IP active | Base | | | | | | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 5% | 7% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 5% | 8% | | No | 7% | 9% | 8% | 10% | 9% | 4% | 0% | 8% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Did not experience difficulties | 88% | 84% | 87% | 90% | 91% | 94% | 95% | 84% |

UKTI users and non-UKTI users were equally likely to report that difficulties in accessing finance had a negative impact on the value of their overseas sales.

Table 217: Whether difficulties in accessing finance had any negative impact on the value of overseas sales by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 9% | 11% | 11% | 0% | 8% | 6% | 11% | 7% | | No | 6% | 8% | 7% | 6% | 4% | 5% | 4% | 5% | | Don’t know | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Did not experience difficulties | 85% | 81% | 81% | 94% | 88% | 90% | 85% | 88% |

| Non-UKTI users | Base | | | | | | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 5% | 6% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 8% | 0% | | No | 7% | 12% | 6% | 0% | 8% | 0% | 0% | 0% | | Did not experience difficulties | 89% | 82% | 88% | 100% | 92% | 98% | 92% | 100% | 10. AWARENESS AND USAGE OF UKTI

10.1 Awareness of UKTI Trade Support Services

All companies were asked a series of questions to ascertain their level of awareness of both UKTI and UKTI’s services offerings. Those aware of UKTI or of any of its services were then asked to indicate whether they had actually used any of these services.

Awareness of UKTI service appears to vary with company age and size with older and larger companies more likely to be aware of the UKTI services. Nearly eight in ten companies (79%) were aware of UKTI, with nearly three-quarters of respondents (71%) aware of the commercial services provided by embassies overseas. These figures are much higher than in the 2008 survey where just over half (51%) were aware of UKTI and the commercial services provided by embassies overseas (55%). However, this does not necessarily reflect an increase in awareness, rather, that this survey sample contained a much higher proportion of users of UKTI services (48%) than the 2008 survey sample (35%).

Table 218: Awareness of UKTI services

| Service | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------------------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UKTI | 79% | 73% | 75% | 74% | 81% | | | | | 86% | 86% | 90% | | Commercial services provided by embassies | 71% | 61% | 63% | 81% | 65% | | overseas | | | 85% | 76% | 88% | | The international Trade Advisors based in | 60% | 53% | 56% | 67% | 59% | | Business Links | | | 66% | 66% | 72% | | Passport to Export | 41% | 34% | 39% | 48% | 35% | | | | | 49% | 38% | 45% | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | 31% | 25% | 26% | 44% | 38% | | | | | 33% | 31% | 44% | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | 11% | 8% | 10% | 11% | 8% | | | | | 15% | 5% | 13% | | The Tradeshow Access Programme (TAP) | 37% | 31% | 35% | 56% | 35% | | | | | 39% | 38% | 46% | | The Overseas marketing Information Service | 41% | 37% | 34% | 48% | 30% | | (OMIS) | | | 45% | 47% | 56% | | Awareness of UKTI or at least one UKTI | 92% | 88% | 89% | 96% | 92% | | service | | | 97% | 97% | 100% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their awareness of many of the UKTI services. However the notable exceptions to this were Passport to Export, ECR and Business Link where IP active and non-IP active firms had similar levels of awareness. Table 219: Awareness of UKTI by IP activity

| IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Commercial services provided by embassies overseas | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | The international Trade Advisors based in Business Links | 65% | 57% | 59% | 71% | 62% | 69% | 68% | 76% | | Passport to Export | 44% | 35% | 42% | 41% | 35% | 58% | 38% | 47% | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | 38% | 32% | 33% | 41% | 38% | 41% | 27% | 53% | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | 12% | 10% | 12% | 0% | 8% | 18% | 8% | 14% | | The Tradeshow Access Programme (TAP) | 45% | 37% | 49% | 53% | 31% | 51% | 43% | 47% | | The Overseas marketing Information Service (OMIS) | 47% | 44% | 44% | 47% | 31% | 48% | 49% | 59% | | Awareness of UKTI or at least one UKTI service | 95% | 90% | 93% | 94% | 92% | 98% | 97% | 100% |

| Non- IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |---------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UKTI | | | 74% | 68% | 69% | 60% | 82% | 86% | 81% | 84% | | Commercial services provided by embassies overseas | 67% | 57% | 58% | 90% | 64% | 86% | 90% | 80% | | The international Trade Advisors based in Business Links | 56% | 50% | 54% | 60% | 55% | 64% | 62% | 60% | | Passport to Export | 38% | 34% | 37% | 60% | 36% | 40% | 38% | 40% | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | 23% | 20% | 21% | 50% | 36% | 24% | 38% | 16% | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | 9% | 6% | 9% | 30% | 9% | 12% | 0% | 8% | | The Tradeshow Access Programme (TAP) | 29% | 26% | 27% | 60% | 45% | 27% | 29% | 44% | | The Overseas marketing Information Service (OMIS) | 34% | 32% | 28% | 50% | 27% | 42% | 43% | 44% | | Awareness of UKTI or at least one UKTI service | 90% | 86% | 86% | 100% | 91% | 96% | 95% | 100% |

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users for all services. Not surprisingly UKTI users were more likely to be aware of each of the UKTI services than non-UKTI users especially the international Trade Advisors in Business Link and the commercial services provided by embassies overseas. Table 220: Awareness of UKTI services by UKTI usage

| UKTI users | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | |------------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|--------|--------|-------|--------|--------|-------| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | UKTI | | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Commercial services provided by embassies overseas | | 91% | 92% | 90% | 89% | 88% | 92% | 93% | 91% | | | | The international Trade Advisors based in Business Links | | 85% | 77% | 82% | 94% | 83% | 92% | 83% | 90% | | | | Passport to Export | | 75% | 75% | 76% | 89% | 71% | 75% | 70% | 73% | | | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | | 52% | 48% | 55% | 61% | 46% | 56% | 41% | 48% | | | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | | 40% | 37% | 36% | 61% | 50% | 39% | 35% | 45% | | | | The Tradeshow Access Programme (TAP) | | 14% | 12% | 16% | 11% | 8% | 18% | 4% | 14% | | | | The Overseas marketing Information Service (OMIS) | | 46% | 44% | 50% | 72% | 42% | 43% | 41% | 45% | | | | Awareness of UKTI or at least one UKTI service | | 52% | 49% | 47% | 67% | 38% | 55% | 54% | 57% | | | | Non-UKTI users | | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UKTI | | 54% | 48% | 52% | 44% | 69% | 62% | 58% | 83% | | | | Commercial services provided by embassies overseas | | 42% | 40% | 34% | 56% | 31% | 60% | 50% | 75% | | | | The international Trade Advisors based in Business Links | | 30% | 24% | 27% | 22% | 38% | 36% | 50% | 67% | | | | Passport to Export | | 18% | 16% | 15% | 22% | 15% | 24% | 25% | 25% | | | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | | 12% | 10% | 10% | 11% | 15% | 10% | 17% | 42% | | | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | | 3% | 3% | 2% | 11% | 8% | 2% | 8% | 8% | | | | The Tradeshow Access Programme (TAP) | | 18% | 13% | 13% | 22% | 23% | 24% | 25% | 58% | | | | The Overseas marketing Information Service (OMIS) | | 18% | 22% | 14% | 11% | 15% | 12% | 17% | 42% | | | | Awareness of UKTI or at least one UKTI service | | 76% | 71% | 72% | 89% | 77% | 86% | 83% | 100% | | |

Usage of UKTI services does appear to vary with both company age and size with older and larger companies more likely to have availed of UKTI services most especially the commercial services provided by embassies overseas. Table 221: Usage of UKTI services

| Service | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------------------------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Base | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | UKTI | 48% | 39% | 41% | 44% | 46% | | Commercial services provided by embassies overseas | 45% | 34% | 36% | 41% | 41% | | The international Trade Advisors based in Business Links | 36% | 28% | 31% | 41% | 32% | | Passport to Export | 15% | 13% | 19% | 11% | 5% | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | 12% | 9% | 7% | 19% | 19% | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | 5% | 2% | 4% | 7% | 3% | | The Tradeshows Access Programme (TAP) | 16% | 11% | 12% | 22% | 14% | | The Overseas marketing Information Service (OMIS) | 19% | 14% | 13% | 19% | 16% | | Usage of UKTI or at least one UKTI service | 68% | 57% | 59% | 67% | 65% |

There were statistically significant differences between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their use of UKTI services. IP active companies were more likely to be aware of UKTI and each of the listed UKTI services than non-IP active companies, most specifically, the commercial services provided by embassies overseas, the international Trade Advisors based in Business Links and OMIS. Table 222: Usage of UKTI services by IP activity

| IP active | Base | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |-----------|------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100+ | | IP active | | | | | | | | | | Base | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100%| 100% | 100% | 100% | | UKTI | 56% | 47% | 46% | 47% | 38% | 66% | 65% | 71% | | Commercial services provided by embassies overseas | 53% | 45% | 46% | 47% | 38% | 55% | 54% | 72% | | The international Trade Advisors based in Business Links | 41% | 36% | 33% | 53% | 35% | 47% | 41% | 49% | | Passport to Export | 18% | 15% | 22% | 6% | 4% | 29% | 5% | 17% | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | 16% | 11% | 10% | 24% | 19% | 19% | 16% | 22% | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | 6% | 1% | 7% | 0% | 4% | 8% | 3% | 11% | | The Tradeshows Access Programme (TAP) | 23% | 20% | 20% | 33% | 21% | 24% | 28% | 26% | | The Overseas marketing Information Service (OMIS) | 24% | 19% | 17% | 29% | 15% | 27% | 27% | 37% | | Usage of UKTI or at least one UKTI service | 76% | 73% | 66% | 71% | 62% | 82% | 81% | 88% |

| Non-IP active | Base | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | |---------------|------|-----|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----| | | | | | | | | | | | | 100% | 100% | 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| 100%| | UKTI | 41% | 33% | 38% | 40% | 64%| 46% | 52% | 52% | 52%| | Commercial services provided by embassies overseas | 37% | 25% | 30% | 30% | 45%| 53% | 67% | 48% | 48%| | The international Trade Advisors based in Business Links | 30% | 22% | 30% | 20% | 27%| 37% | 33% | 44% | 44%| | Passport to Export | 13% | 12% | 17% | 20% | 9% | 11% | 0% | 4% | 4% | | The Export Marketing Research Scheme (EMRS) | 7% | 7% | 6% | 10% | 18%| 9% | 14% | 0% | 0% | | Export Communication Reviews (ECR) | 3% | 2% | 2% | 20% | 0% | 6% | 0% | 4% | 4% | | The Tradeshows Access Programme (TAP) | 17% | 13% | 12% | 11% | 23%| 24% | 25% | 58% | 58%| | The Overseas marketing Information Service (OMIS) | 14% | 9% | 11% | 0% | 18%| 18% | 33% | 20% | 20%| | Usage of UKTI or at least one UKTI service | 60% | 44% | 56% | 60% | 73%| 75% | 76% | 92% | 92%|

10.2 Business Link

All companies were asked whether prior to the interview they had heard of Business Link. For those who required it there was also an explanation of Business Link as follows:

“Business Link is a free business advice and support service, available online and through local advisers”

Those who had heard of Business Link were asked whether they had used Business Link. All respondents were then asked how likely they would be to use Business Link in the future.

Awareness of Business Link was very high, and indeed higher than that of UKTI, especially among older companies, as shown in the table below. Table 223: Awareness of Business Link

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|------------|-----------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 90% | 85% | 91% | 85% | 81% | 95% | 95% | 94% | | No | 9% | 14% | 9% | 15% | 19% | 4% | 5% | 6% | | Don’t know | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% |

Awareness of Business Link is comparable amongst IP active and non-IP active companies, as shown in the table below.

Table 224: Awareness of Business Link by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|------------|-----------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 92% | 88% | 91% | 82% | 81% | 95% | 100% | 95% | | No | 8% | 12% | 9% | 18% | 19% | 5% | 0% | 5% | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 89% | 82% | 91% | 90% | 82% | 96% | 86% | 88% | | No | 11% | 16% | 9% | 10% | 18% | 3% | 14% | 12% | | Don’t know | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0% | 0% |

There were statistically significant differences between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding whether they had heard of Business Link prior to the interview. UKTI users were more likely than non-UKTI users to have heard of Business Link.

Table 225: Awareness of Business Link by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------|------------|-----------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 95% | 92% | 97% | 94% | 83% | 98% | 98% | 93% | | No | 5% | 8% | 3% | 6% | 17% | 2% | 2% | 7% | | Non-UKTI users | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Yes | 80% | 75% | 81% | 67% | 77% | 86% | 83% | 100% | | No | 19% | 23% | 19% | 33% | 23% | 12% | 17% | 0% | | Don’t know | 1% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% |

Six in ten companies (60%) had used Business Link with usage being more likely amongst older companies. Table 226: Usage of Business Link

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Yes | 60% | 52% | 62% | 56% | 57% | 66% | 66% | 65% | | No | 28% | 31% | 28% | 26% | 24% | 27% | 28% | 26% | | Don’t know | 2% | 2% | 0% | 4% | 0% | 3% | 2% | 3% | | Not aware of Business Link | 10% | 15% | 9% | 15% | 19% | 5% | 5% | 6% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their likelihood of use of Business Link. IP active companies were more likely to have used Business Link than non-IP active companies.

Table 227: Usage of Business Link by IP Activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Yes | 65% | 62% | 62% | 65% | 58% | 73% | 62% | 65% | | No | 25% | 23% | 28% | 18% | 23% | 19% | 35% | 28% | | Don’t know | 2% | 3% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 3% | 3% | 2% | | Not aware of Business Link | 8% | 12% | 9% | 18% | 19% | 5% | 0% | 5% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Yes | 56% | 44% | 62% | 40% | 55% | 59% | 71% | 64% | | No | 31% | 37% | 28% | 40% | 27% | 35% | 14% | 20% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 0% | 10% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 4% | | Not aware of Business Link | 11% | 18% | 9% | 10% | 18% | 4% | 14% | 12% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding their likelihood of use of Business Link. UKTI users were more likely to have used Business Link than non-UKTI users (72% vs 35%).

Table 228: Usage of Business Link by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | 154 | 46 | 96 | | Yes | 72% | 71% | 78% | 72% | 67% | 73% | 70% | 69% | | No | 20% | 19% | 19% | 17% | 17% | 23% | 26% | 21% | | Don’t know | 2% | 2% | 1% | 6% | 0% | 3% | 2% | 3% | | Not aware of Business Link | 5% | 8% | 3% | 6% | 17% | 2% | 2% | 7% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Non-UKTI users | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | 42 | 12 | 12 | | Yes | 35% | 27% | 40% | 22% | 38% | 40% | 50% | 33% | | No | 44% | 48% | 42% | 44% | 38% | 43% | 33% | 67% | | Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | | Not aware of Business Link | 20% | 25% | 19% | 33% | 23% | 14% | 17% | 0% | Nearly six in ten companies (56%) felt that it was ‘very likely’ or ‘quite likely’ that they would use Business Link at some stage in the future.

Table 229: Likelihood of using Business Link in the future

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Total | 911 | 236 | 249 | 27 | 37 | | | | | 196 | 58 | 108 | | Very likely | 22% | 21% | 27% | 33% | 14% | | | | | 20% | 21% | 20% | | Quite likely | 34% | 34% | 28% | 15% | 38% | | | | | 38% | 40% | 38% | | Quite unlikely | 20% | 17% | 20% | 30% | 22% | | | | | 21% | 22% | 19% | | Very unlikely | 14% | 14% | 16% | 11% | 22% | | | | | 12% | 7% | 17% | | Don’t know | 10% | 14% | 9% | 11% | 5% | | | | | 8% | 10% | 6% |

There was a statistically significant difference between IP active and non-IP active companies regarding their likelihood of use of Business Link in the future. A higher proportion of IP active companies (60%) than non-IP active companies (51%) indicate that they are likely to use Business Link in the future.

Table 230: Likelihood of using Business Link in the future by IP activity

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | IP active | 457 | 107 | 90 | 17 | 26 | | | | | 97 | 37 | 83 | | Very likely | 23% | 16% | 33% | 47% | 8% | | | | | 25% | 19% | 23% | | Quite likely | 37% | 42% | 24% | 12% | 46% | | | | | 43% | 46% | 36% | | Quite unlikely | 17% | 13% | 16% | 24% | 23% | | | | | 16% | 22% | 20% | | Very unlikely | 12% | 13% | 16% | 6% | 19% | | | | | 6% | 8% | 14% | | Don’t know | 10% | 16% | 11% | 12% | 4% | | | | | 9% | 5% | 6% |

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |----------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | Base | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | Non-IP active | 454 | 129 | 159 | 10 | 11 | | | | | 99 | 21 | 25 | | Very likely | 21% | 26% | 23% | 10% | 27% | | | | | 16% | 24% | 12% | | Quite likely | 30% | 28% | 30% | 20% | 18% | | | | | 32% | 29% | 44% | | Quite unlikely | 23% | 21% | 23% | 40% | 18% | | | | | 26% | 24% | 16% | | Very unlikely | 17% | 14% | 17% | 20% | 27% | | | | | 18% | 5% | 24% | | Don’t know | 9% | 12% | 8% | 10% | 9% | | | | | 7% | 19% | 4% |

There was a statistically significant difference between UKTI users and non-UKTI users regarding their likelihood of use of Business Link in the future. UKTI users (65%) are more likely to indicate that they will use Business Link in the future compared to non-UKTI users (38%). Table 231: Likelihood of using Business Link in the future by UKTI usage

| | Total | Up to 5 years | 6-10 years | 10+ years | |------------------|-------|---------------|------------|-----------| | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | | | | 0 - 49 | 50 - 99 | 100 + | | UKTI users | Base | | | | | | Base | 621 | 135 | 148 | 18 | 24 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Very likely | 29% | 30% | 37% | 44% | 21% | | | | | | | | | Quite likely | 36% | 40% | 26% | 11% | 42% | | | | | | | | | Quite unlikely | 18% | 13% | 18% | 28% | 21% | | | | | | | | | Very unlikely | 10% | 7% | 13% | 11% | 13% | | | | | | | | | Don’t know | 7% | 10% | 5% | 6% | 4% | | | | | | | | | Non-UKTI users | Base | | | | | | Base | 290 | 101 | 101 | 9 | 13 | | | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | | Very likely | 9% | 10% | 11% | 11% | 0% | | | | | | | | | Quite likely | 29% | 27% | 31% | 22% | 31% | | | | | | | | | Quite unlikely | 24% | 23% | 23% | 33% | 23% | | | | | | | | | Very unlikely | 23% | 23% | 22% | 11% | 38% | | | | | | | | | Don’t know | 15% | 18% | 14% | 22% | 8% |

Accent UKTI Evaluation Final Report November 2010.doc•TM•12.07.10 Page 137 of 137 APPENDIX A

SIC Code Exclusions | SIC Code Exclusions | |---------------------| | Grow cereals & other crops | 01 | | Grow vegetables & nursery products | 01 | | Grow fruit, nuts, beverage & spice crops | 01 | | Farming of cattle, dairy farming | 01 | | Farming of poultry | 01 | | Other farming of animals | 01 | | Other farming of animals | 01 | | Crops combined with animals, mixed farms | 01 | | Agricultural service activities | 01 | | Animal husbandry services, not vets | 01 | | Forestry & logging related services | 02 | | Fishing | 05 | | Operation of fish hatcheries & farms | 05 | | Extraction of petroleum & natural gas | 11 | | Services to oil and gas extraction | 11 | | Mining of non-ferrous metal ores | 13 | | Quarrying of stone for construction | 14 | | Quarrying of slate | 14 | | Production of salt | 14 | | Other mining and quarrying | 14 | | Manufacture of luggage & the like, saddlery | 19 | | Sawmill, plane, impregnation wood | 20 | | Manufacture of pulp | 21 | | Manufacture of paper & paperboard | 21 | | Manufacture corrugated paper & containers | 21 | | Manufacture corrugated paper & containers | 21 | | Manufacture of household & toilet goods | 21 | | Manufacture of paper stationery | 21 | | Manufacture of paper stationery | 21 | | Manufacture of wallpaper | 21 | | Manufacture of paper & paperboard goods | 21 | | Other activities to printing | 22 | | Manufacture of basic iron & steel (ecsc) | 27 | | Manufacture of steel tubes | 27 | | Other 1st process iron & steel | 27 | | Precious metals production | 27 | | Aluminium production | 27 | | Copper production | 27 | | Other non-ferrous metal production | 27 | | Casting of iron | 27 | | Forge press stamp & roll form metal | 28 | | Treatment and coat metals | 28 | | Recycling non-metal waste & scrap | 37 | | Manufacture of gas; mains distribution | 40 | | Collection, purify etc. of water | 41 | | Demolition buildings; earth moving | 45 | | Test drilling and boring | 45 | | General construction & civil engineering | 45 | | General construction & civil engineering | 45 | | Erection of roof covering & frames | 45 | | Construction roads, airfields etc. | 45 | | Construction of water projects | 45 | | Other special trades construction | 45 | | Installation electrical wiring etc. | 45 | | Plumbing | 45 | | Service Description | Code | |----------------------------------------------------------|------| | Other building installation | 45 | | Plastering | 45 | | Joinery installation | 45 | | Floor and wall covering | 45 | | Painting and glazing | 45 | | Other building completion | 45 | | Sale of motor vehicles | 50 | | Maintenance & repair of motors | 50 | | Sale of motor vehicle parts etc. | 50 | | Sale, repair etc. m'cycles & parts | 50 | | Retail sale of automotive fuel | 50 | | Retail non-special stores food, etc. | 52 | | Other retail non-specialised stores | 52 | | Retail of fruit and vegetables | 52 | | Retail of meat and meat products | 52 | | Retail of fish, crustaceans etc. | 52 | | Retail bread, cakes, confectionery | 52 | | Retail alcoholic & other beverages | 52 | | Retail sale of tobacco products | 52 | | Other retail food etc. specialised | 52 | | Dispensing chemists | 52 | | Retail sale of textiles | 52 | | Retail sale of clothing | 52 | | Retail of footwear & leather goods | 52 | | Retail furniture household etc. | 52 | | Retail furniture household etc. | 52 | | Retail electric household, etc. goods | 52 | | Retail hardware, paints & glass | 52 | | Retail books, newspapers etc. | 52 | | Other retail specialised stores | 52 | | Retail second-hand goods in stores | 52 | | Retail sale via mail order houses | 52 | | Other non-store retail sale | 52 | | Repair boots, shoes, leather goods | 52 | | Repair electrical household goods | 52 | | Repair of clocks & jewellery | 52 | | Repair not elsewhere classified | 52 | | Hotels & motels, with restaurant | 55 | | Youth hostels and mountain refuges | 55 | | Camp sites, including caravan sites | 55 | | Other provision of lodgings | 55 | | Restaurants | 55 | | Bars | 55 | | Catering | 55 | | Transport via railways | 60 | | Other scheduled passenger land transport | 60 | | Taxi operation | 60 | | Other passenger land transport | 60 | | Freight transport by road | 60 | | Transport via pipelines | 60 | | Sea and coastal water transport | 61 | | Inland water transport | 61 | | Scheduled air transport | 62 | | Non-scheduled air transport | 62 | | Storage and warehousing | 63 | | Other supporting water transport | 63 | | Travel agencies etc; tourist | 63 | | Activity | Code | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National post activities | 64 | | Non-life insurance | 66 | | Development & sell real estate | 70 | | Letting of own property | 70 | | Real estate agencies | 70 | | Manage real estate, fee or contract | 70 | | Renting of automobiles | 71 | | Rent other land transport equipment | 71 | | Rent water transport equipment | 71 | | Rent civil engineering machinery | 71 | | Rent office machinery inc. computers | 71 | | Rent personal & household goods | 71 | | Industrial cleaning | 74 | | Legal activities | 74 | | Justice and judicial activities | 75 | | Public security, law & order | 75 | | Fire service activities | 75 | | Compulsory social security | 75 | | Primary education | 80 | | General secondary education | 80 | | Technical & vocational secondary | 80 | | Higher education | 80 | | Driving school activities | 80 | | Adult and other education | 80 | | Hospital activities | 85 | | Medical practice activities | 85 | | Dental practice activities | 85 | | Other human health activities | 85 | | Veterinary activities | 85 | | Social work with accommodation | 85 | | Social work without accommodation | 85 | | Business & employers organisations | 91 | | Professional organisations | 91 | | Religious organisations | 91 | | Political organisations | 91 | | Other membership organisations | 91 | | Motion picture projection | 92 | | Artistic & literary creation | 92 | | Operation of arts facilities | 92 | | Operation of arts facilities | 92 | | Fair and amusement park activities | 92 | | Other entertainment activities | 92 | | Library and archives activities | 92 | | Museum & preservation of history | 92 | | Botanical, zoos & nature reserves | 92 | | Operate sports arenas & stadiums | 92 | | Other sporting activities | 92 | | Gambling and betting activities | 92 | | Other recreational activities | 92 | | Wash & dry clean textile & fur | 93 | | Hairdressing & other beauty treatment | 93 | | Funeral and related activities | 93 | | Physical well-being activities | 93 | | Other service activities | 93 | | Private households with employees | 95 | | Extra-territorial organisations | 99 | Appendix B

Questionnaire Recruitment

Could I please speak to either the owner or someone responsible for your firm’s strategy in relation to your company’s non-UK business activity? Good morning/afternoon/evening. My name is ....... from Accent, an independent market research agency and I am carrying out research for the UK Trade & Investment and the Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform (BERR) on the topic of UK based businesses conducting business outside of the UK.

We are interested in talking to a range of UK based firms either currently involved in any form of business activity outside of the UK or who are currently considering any form of business activity outside of the UK in the next 12 months. This overseas business activity might comprise, for example, selling directly to businesses or individuals abroad, selling to businesses or individuals abroad through agents or distributors, licensing or franchising overseas, or other contractual arrangements (including joint ventures) or operating your own overseas site or office. We are interested in talking to any UK based companies who are either currently, or who are intending in the next 12 months, to conduct any international business activity in any form. Please note, this call is being recorded for quality control purposes.

INTERVIEWER NOTE - YOU MAY TAKE REFERRALS TO ANOTHER SITE WITHIN THE UK.

INTERVIEWER NOTE – IF FIRM IS NOT CURRENTLY DOING BUSINESS OVERSEAS, BUT PLANNING ON DOING SO WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR CONTINUE WITH THE INTERVIEW ON THIS BASIS

This research will cover areas such as your current or potential overseas business activities, covering the way you go about doing business overseas and any issues you may have faced. It will take around 20 minutes to complete, depending upon your answers.

AS NECESSARY: We are able to offer all businesses taking part in this research an electronic link to a summary report of the research findings

AS NECESSARY: IT DOESN’T MATTER HOW MUCH OR HOW LITTLE OVERSEAS BUSINESS YOU DO – WE’RE INTERESTED IN SPEAKING TO A RANGE OF FIRMS ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCES.

AS NECESSARY UKTI is responsible for helping UK firms do business overseas. They want to find out more about how firms are going about overseas business and any difficulties they have. This will help UKTI develop the type of help they offer to UK firms The research is being conducted under the Code of Practice of the Market Research Society, which means that all of the answers you give are strictly confidential and anonymous. Participation in this survey is voluntary. You do not have to answer any questions you do not wish to and you can terminate the interview at any point.

The responses of all organisations taking part will be combined into a statistical report.

Your organisation was selected at random from a list of UK businesses held by a commercial list broker.

If you wish to check that Accent is a bona fide market research agency, you can contact the Market Research Society on 0500 396999, or call Teresa McGarry at Accent on 0208 742 2211 or Heather Booth di Giovanni at UK Trade & Investment on 020 7215 4989.

Q1. Is it convenient to speak to you now or would you prefer to make an appointment for another time?

1. Speak now
2. Call back

Q2. Can I confirm that you are one of the people best qualified to talk about your company’s overseas business activity?

INTERVIEWER NOTE: IF KNOW ALREADY THAT YOU ARE SPEAKING TO THE CORRECT PERSON THEN CODE YES AUTOMATICALLY

REFERRALS CAN BE TAKEN TO ANY SITE WHEN THE CONTACT FEELS THAT THERE IS SOMEONE WITHIN THE COMPANY BETTER PLACED TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON THE TOPIC AREAS OUTLINED

1. Yes
2. No – take referral and being transferred
3. No – take referral and arrange call back
4. No – refused referral THANK AND CLOSE

Q2b: May I ask your name and job title?

INTERVIEWER: PERSON NEEDS TO BE A SENIOR LEVEL BUSINESS PERSON SUCH AS THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, GENERAL MANAGER, COMMERCIAL DIRECTOR, HEAD OF MARKET DEVELOPMENT, SALES DIRECTOR ETC. IF NOT ASK TO SPEAK TO SOMEONE ELSE.

SCREENER

Q3. ASK ALL Which of the following overseas business activities has your firm been involved in, over the last 5 years? READ OUT – CODE ALL THAT APPLY

INTERVIEWER: ‘ABROAD’ MEANS OUTSIDE OF THE UK

1. Selling directly to businesses or individuals abroad

2. Selling to businesses or individuals abroad through agents or distributors

3. Licensing or franchising overseas, or other contractual arrangements (including joint ventures)

4. Operating your own overseas site or office

5. (None of these) ASK Q4

6. Don’t know THANK AND CLOSE Q4. **IF NONE AT Q3 (CODE 5) ASK:** Are you seriously considering starting to conduct overseas business via any of these routes in the **NEXT YEAR**?

7. Yes

8. No **THANK AND CLOSE**

9. Don’t know **THANK AND CLOSE**

Q5. **(IF Q4=1) ASK:** Which of the following overseas business activities are you planning to become involved in, in the next year? **CODE ALL THAT APPLY**

**INTERVIEWER: ‘ABROAD’ MEANS OUTSIDE OF THE UK**

1. Selling to businesses or individuals abroad
2. Selling to businesses or individuals abroad through agents or distributors
3. Licensing or franchising overseas, or other contractual arrangements (including joint ventures)
4. Operating your own overseas site or office
5. None of these **THANK AND CLOSE**
6. Don’t know **THANK AND CLOSE**

Q6. **IF CODE 3 AT Q3 OR CODE 3 AT Q5** You mentioned licensing or franchising overseas, or other contractual arrangements, but is this/ will this be licensing, franchising or some other partnership or joint venture arrangement? **CODE ALL THAT APPLY**

**INTERVIEWER NOTE:** IF RESPONDENT HAS ALREADY PROVIDED THIS INFORMATION DO NOT ASK QUESTION AND CODE AS APPROPRIATE

**INTERVIEWER NOTE:** IF IN DOUBT, RESPONDENT SHOULD SELECT THE MOST APPROPRIATE OPTION

1. Licensing
2. Franchising
3. Other partnership or joint venture arrangement
4. Don’t know

Q7. **IF CODE 3 AT Q6:** Would you say that the **MAIN** purpose of this partnership or joint venture is/will be? **READ OUT. CODE ALL THAT APPLY**

1. Manufacturing
2. Assembly
3. Call centre
4. Distribution/sales office
5. After-sales office
6. Service delivery
7. Research, product or process development
8. Something else (SPECIFY)
9. Don’t know

Q8. **IF CODE 4 AT Q3 OR CODE 4 AT Q5** You mentioned operating your own overseas office or site. How many overseas sites do you have/ will you have? **READ OUT. CODE ONE ONLY**

1. One
2. 2-5
3. 6-10
4. 11-20
5. 21-50
6. More than 50
7. Don’t know
8. Refused

Q9. **(IF CODE 1 AT Q8) OR (CODE 4 AT Q5) ONLY ONE SITE:** Would you say that the **MAIN** purpose of this office or site is/will be…

**OR (IF CODE 2-6 AT Q8) OR CODE 4 AT Q5:** Would you say that the **MAIN** purpose of these offices or sites are/will be: **READ OUT**

**READ OUT SINGLE CODE**

1. Manufacturing
2. Assembly
3. Call centre
4. Distribution/sales office
5. After-sales office
6. Service delivery
7. Research, product or process development
8. Don’t know

Q10. **(IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3):** Have you **IMPORTED** any goods or services over the last 5 years **(excluding through partnerships, joint ventures and production sites)?**

**PROMPT:** By importing I mean the buying in of goods or services from overseas suppliers

1. Yes
2. No **GO TO Q12**
3. Don’t know **GO TO Q12**

Q11. **IF CODE 1 (YES) AT Q10:** Do you import…? **READ OUT**

1. Direct from an overseas supplier
2. Or, through a UK-based intermediary
3. Or, both
4. Don’t know

**INTERVIEWER:** **READ OUT:** FROM NOW ON, WHEN I’M ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR OVERSEAS BUSINESS ACTIVITY PLEASE DO NOT INCLUDE IMPORTING

Q12. **ASK ALL** And can I just ask, how long ago was your business established?

**READ OUT –INTERVIEWER:** THIS MEANS WHEN THE BUSINESS IN ITS CURRENT FORM STARTED TRADING

**INTERVIEWER:** IF THE BUSINESS IS A SUBSIDIARY THIS REFERS TO THE SUBSIDIARY IN WHICH THEY WORK

01. Within the last year
02. Over 1, up to 2 years ago
03. Over 2, up to 3 years ago
04. Over 3, up to 4 years ago
05. Over 4, up to 5 years ago
06. Over 5, up to 10 years ago
07. Over 10, up to 20 years ago
08. Over 20 years ago
09. Not yet trading
10. Don’t know
11. Refused

Q13. **(ASK IF CODES 1-2 AT Q12) IF ESTABLISHED 1-2 YEARS.** Can I just check, has your business actually started trading yet?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q14. **ASK ALL** And what is the main activity of the business? **PROBE FULLY FOR INDUSTRY TYPE - IF MANUFACTURING WHAT TYPE OF MANUFACTURING, IF FINANCIAL SERVICES WHAT KIND AND SO FORTH**

01. Agriculture, hunting & forestry
02. Fishing
03. Mining & quarrying
04. Manufacturing
05. Electricity, gas and water supply
06. Construction
07. Retail, wholesale & repair of motor vehicles
08. Hotels and catering
09. Transport, storage and communication
10. Financial intermediation (Finance)
11. Real estate, renting & business activities
12. Public administration and defence
13. Education
14. Health and social work
15. Other community, social & personal service activities
16. Other (specify)
17. Don’t know
18. Refused

**SECTION A: OVERSEAS BUSINESS ACTIVITY**

Q15. **(ASK IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3)** As a company would you say you are…? **READ OUT – SINGLE CODE**

1. Very experienced in overseas markets
2. Quite experienced
3. Not very experienced
4. Or not at all experienced in overseas markets
5. Don’t know
6. Refused

Q16. **(ASK IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3)** And how long ago did your company start conducting business overseas? **READ OUT AS NECESSARY – ANSWER MUST NOT BE GREATER THAN Q12**

01. Within the last year
02. Over 1, up to 2 years ago
03. Over 2, up to 3 years ago
04. Over 3, up to 4 years ago
05. Over 4, up to 5 years ago
06. Over 5, up to 10 years ago
07. Over 10, up to 20 years ago
08. Over 20 years ago
09. Have not yet started doing business overseas
10. Don’t know
11. Refused

Q17. **(ASK IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3)** How many overseas countries have you done business in over the last 5 years, in any form? **IF IMPORTER (IE CODE 1 AT Q10) READ OUT: although please DO NOT include countries that you have only imported from.** **READ OUT CODES**

1. None Q18. **(IF CODE 2 AT 0)** Which country was this? **WRITE IN**

Q19. **(ASK IF CODE 4 AT Q3 OR CODE 4 AT Q5 OR Q7 NE 4)**: Can I just check, have you made any sales at all to customers in overseas markets in the last year?

1. Yes
2. No **GO TO Q22**
3. Don’t know **GO TO Q22**

Q20. **(ASK IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3)**: I would now like to move on to talking a bit more about your current/planned overseas business activity. **ADD AS NECESSARY**: And by that I mean selling goods or services to either businesses or individuals based abroad.

In the last financial year, approximately what percentage of your turnover was accounted for by overseas sales? **RECORD PERCENTAGE**

**IF CODE 3 AT Q3 SAY:** Please include any fees received from overseas companies or overseas licensing deals.

1. Write in (%) **GO TO Q22**
2. Don’t know
3. Refused **GO TO Q22**

**CATI TO CHECK NUMBER IS BETWEEN 0 AND 100**

Q21. **(IF CODE 2 AT Q20)** If you had to estimate this percentage, into which of the following bands would you put your business? **READ OUT**

1. Up to 5%
2. 6 - 10%
3. 11 - 15%
4. 16 – 25%
5. 26 – 50%
6. 51 – 75%
7. More than 75%
8. Don’t know
9. Refused

Q22. **(ASK IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3)**: And in a year’s time, approximately what percentage of your turnover do you anticipate will be accounted for by overseas sales? **AS NECESSARY**: Please just answer for the UK part of your business?

**IF CODE 3 AT Q3 SAY:** Please include any fees received from overseas companies or overseas licensing deals

1. Write in (%) **GO TO Q24**

2. Don’t know

3. Refused **GO TO Q24** Q23. **(IF CODE 2 DON’T KNOW AT Q22):** In a year’s time do you think the percentage of your turnover that is accounted for by overseas sales will be higher than it is now, lower, or about the same? **READ OUT**

4. Higher

5. Lower

6. About the same

7. Don’t know

8. Refused

Q24. **(IF Q3 =1-4 OR Q4 =1):** I’m going to read out some possible benefits of selling into overseas markets, and I’d like you to tell me whether each one applies to your business. So firstly…

Has selling into overseas markets... **READ OUT. ORDER OF STATEMENTS TO BE RANDOMISED**

| Yes | No | |-----|----| | 1. Enabled you to achieve a level of growth otherwise not possible? | 1 | 2 | 3 | | 2. Allowed you to fully utilise your existing capacity? | 1 | 2 | 3 | | 3. Reduced your dependence on a single or small number of markets? | 1 | 2 | 3 | | 4. Exposed you to new ideas? | 1 | 2 | 3 | | 5. Increased the commercial life span of any of your products or services? | 1 | 2 | 3 |

Q25. **ASK FOR EACH OF Q24 CODES 1-5 THAT HAS BEEN A BENEFIT (IE CODE 1). ASK Q25 DIRECTLY AFTER EACH Q24 STATEMENT:** And on a scale 1 to 5, where 1 means ‘to no extent’ and 5 means ‘to a critical extent’ to what extent (If Q3=1-4) do you feel that this has been a benefit/ (Q4 = 1) do you feel that this would be a benefit of selling into overseas markets? **READ OUT AS NECESSARY**

| No | Neither | Critical DK | |----|---------|-------------| | 1. Enabled you to achieve a level of growth otherwise not possible? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | | 2. Allowed you to fully utilise your existing capacity? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | | 3. Reduced your dependence on a single or small number of markets? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | | 4. Exposed you to new ideas? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | | 5. Increased the commercial life span of any of your products or services? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |

**SECTION B – DRIVERS OF MARKET**

Q26. **(IF Q17=3-7 (AND Q12 = 1-8 OR Q13=1)):** Thinking now about the overseas countries that you have done business in within the last 5 years, which was the most challenging to do business in? Was it? **OR (IF Q17=2 AND (Q12 = 1-8 OR Q13=1))** So the only overseas country you have done business in is <Q18> Is this correct? **OR (IF Q4=1):** Which overseas country is your firm planning to become involved in, in the next year? **PROMPT. SINGLE CODE**

**INTERVIEWER NOTE: IF RESPONDENT CAN’T NAME THE MOST CHALLENGING COUNTRY ASK THEM TO LIST THE MOST RECENT OVERSEAS COUNTRY FOR DOING BUSINESS/THINKING OF DOING BUSINESS** Q27. And which of the following overseas business activities did this/will this involve in <Q26>? READ OUT – SINGLE CODE

1. Selling directly to businesses or individuals abroad
2. Selling to businesses or individuals abroad through agents or distributors
3. Licensing
4. Franchising overseas
5. Other contractual arrangements (including joint ventures)
6. Operating your own overseas site or office
7. Don’t know

Q28. (IF CODE 4 AT Q27) What was/will be the MAIN purpose of this site? Was it … READ OUT SINGLE CODE

1. Manufacturing
2. Assembly
3. Call centre
4. Distribution/sales office
5. After-sales office
6. Service delivery
7. Research, product or process development
8. Don’t know

MODE: M1: SELLING DIRECT: IF Q27=1: M2: SELLING THROUGH AGENTS/DISTRIBUTORS IF Q27=2 M3-M5: SELLING THROUGH LICENSING IF Q27=3 M6: PRODUCTION SITE: IF Q28 = CODES 1-2 M7: CALL CENTRE: IF Q28 = CODE 3 M8: SALES/SERVICE CENTRE: IF Q28 = CODES 4-6 M9: R & D SITE: IF Q28 = CODE 7

Q29. (IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3): How long have you done business < IN Q26 >? READ OUT AS NECESSARY – ANSWER MUST NOT BE GREATER THAN Q16

01. Less than a year
02. Over 1, up to 2 years
03. Over 2, up to 3 years
04. Over 3, up to 4 years
05. Over 4, up to 5 years
06. Over 5, up to 10 years
07. Over 10, up to 20 years
08. Over 20 years
09. Have not yet started
10. Don’t know
11. Refused

Q30. IF M6, M7 OR M9: Can I just check, does your/ would this (IF M6: PRODUCTION SITE/ IF M7: CALLCENTRE/ IF M9 R&D SITE in < Q26 >) sell any products or services directly to any customers < IN Q26 >? READ OUT – SINGLE CODE

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q31. IF M1, M2, M3-M5 OR M8 OR CODE 1 AT Q30: Have you had to/Do you expect to need to modify any of your products or services for customers < IN Q26 >?

1. Yes
2. No GO TO Q33
3. Don’t know GO TO Q33

Q32. IF YES (CODE 1) AT Q31: Was this/ Are you expecting this to be …? READ OUT - MULTICODE

1. Something cosmetic such as packaging or translation
2. Or something more fundamental
3. None of these
4. Don’t know

Q33. M5 OR M6: Can I just check, do you / would you import into the UK at all IF M5 <through this partnership or joint venture>/ IF M6 <from this production site >? READ OUT – SINGLE CODE

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q34. ASK ALL: I’m going to read out some of the individual circumstances that other firms have found themselves in when looking at doing business in specific overseas locations and I’d like you to tell me the extent to which each one applied to you when you were FIRST CONSIDERING doing business < in Q26>.

Please give me a score of 1 to 5, where 1 means that it is ‘not at all applicable’ and 5 means that it is ‘completely applicable’ and so firstly…READ OUT - RANDOMISE

To what extent did the following (READ OUT CODES 1 -5) apply to you when you were FIRST CONSIDERING doing business <in Q26>?

| Not at all applicable | Not applicable | Neither | Applies | Completely applicable | |-----------------------|----------------|---------|---------|-----------------------| | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |

1. We had received an approach from someone in <Q26> .........................................................1 ................ 2.............. 3............... 4............... 5............
2. It had been suggested to us by someone external to the company that <Q26> might be an opportunity for us..............1 ................ 2.............. 3............... 4............... 5............
3. There was someone within the company who already had experience of <Q26> .........................................................1 ................ 2.............. 3............... 4............... 5............
4. We had been considering a number of countries at the time, and decided to focus on <Q26> .........................................................1 ................ 2.............. 3............... 4............... 5............
5. We had identified internally that <Q26> offered a potential opportunity for us .........................................................1 ................ 2.............. 3............... 4............... 5............

Q35. ASK ALL Thinking now about your (IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3) experiences so far of (IF CODE 1 AT Q4) your plans for doing business in <Q26> how easy or difficult (IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3) has it been / (IF CODE 1 AT Q4) do you expect it to be on a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 is ‘very easy’ and 5 is ‘very difficult’?

READ OUT – RANDOMISE

| Very Easy | Fairly easy | Average | Fairly difficult | Very difficult | NA | |-----------|-------------|---------|------------------|----------------|----|

1How easy or difficult (IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3) has it been (IF CODE 1 AT Q4) do you expect it to be > for you to find customers < in Q26 > 1 2 3 4 5 6 2. IF M3-M5: How easy or difficult (IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3) has it been (IF CODE 1 AT Q4) do you expect it to be > for you to find a suitable partner 1 2 3 4 5 6 3. How easy or difficult (IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3) has it been (IF CODE 1 AT Q4) do you expect it to be > for you to negotiate the legal and regulatory framework or standards < in Q26 > 1 2 3 4 5 6 4. How easy or difficult (IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3) has it been (IF CODE 1 AT Q4) do you expect it to be > for you to negotiate the culture and language < in Q26 > 1 2 3 4 5 6 5. How easy or difficult (IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3) has it been (IF CODE 1 AT Q4) do you expect it to be > for you to protect your Intellectual Property 1 2 3 4 5 6 6. How easy or difficult has it been for you to deal with the logistics of doing business < in Q26 > 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. IF M6-M9: How easy or difficult (IF CODES 1-3 AT Q3) has it been (IF CODE 1 AT Q4) do you expect it to be > for you to recruit and retain suitable staff 1 2 3 4 5 6 8. (IF YES AT Q31) How easy or difficult (IF CODES 1-4 AT Q3) has it been (IF CODE 1 AT Q4) do you expect it to be > for you to make any modifications to your products or services so that they are suitable for customers < in Q26 > 1 2 3 4 5 6

Q36. REMOVE: QUESTION

Q37. ASK ALL: And how do you view the RISK of doing business < in Q26 > IF M3-M7 OR M9 in terms of the following? READ OUT - RANDOMISE

Would you say that the risk < in Q26 > of \<codes 1-3) is…?

| Very low | Fairly low | Average | fairly high | very high | NA | |----------|------------|---------|-------------|-----------|----|

1. Ensuring you get paid and enforcing contracts? 1 2 3 4 5 6
2. The financial risk in terms of whether you will be able to make a profit in <Q26>? 1 2 3 4 5 6

SECTION D – BARRIERS

Q38. ASK ALL: I’d now like you to think about the difficulties or problems that a firm IN A SIMILAR POSITION TO YOURSELF in terms of size, sector and structure might face doing business <in Q26>.

I’m going to read out a list of possible issues and I’d like you tell me the extent to which a firm SIMILAR TO YOURSELF would encounter each one when trying to do business < in Q26 >. Please give me a score of 1 to 5 for the extent to which you feel that this is likely to be a difficulty, where 1 means that it would 'not be a problem at all' and 5 means it would be 'extremely difficult'

SO FIRSTLY, ... READ OUT - ROTATE LIST ALWAYS ASK STATEMENT H AFTER STATEMENT G ALWAYS ASK STATEMENTS B, C & D IN ORDER

ON EACH OF THE E1 SCREENS ADD AFTER EACH STATEMENT

| No problem | Extremely | Neither | Difficult | |------------|-----------|---------|-----------| | at all | NA | Don’t | difficult |

01. Obtaining basic information about (IF M1)/ DOING BUSINESS/(IF M2-M9< in Q26> 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

02. Identifying who to make contact with in the first instance , (IF M2-5) or finding a suitable partner> 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

03. Establishing an initial dialogue with prospective \<IF M1, M5 OR M8> customers or business partners < in Country > 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

04. Building relationships with key influencers or decision-makers 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

05. Cultural differences outside of any language barriers 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

06. IF M1-5 Not having IF M1 an / IF M3-M5 their own office or site < in Q26 > 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

07. IF M1-M6 OR M8 A bias or preference on the part of customers in <Q26> for doing business with firms from < Q26 > 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

08. The costs associated with doing business < in Q26 > 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

09. Finding the necessary management time to devote to doing business < in Q26 > 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

10. Exchange rates and currency 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

11. IF M6-M9: Problems obtaining work permits or visas for staff to allow them to relocate to < Q26 > 1……………2 ……………3……………4……………5……………6……………

SECTION F – DIVERSIFICATION AND EMERGING/FAST GROWING MARKETS

Q39. (ASK IF Q17 = 3-7): Focusing on the overall balance of your international activity, can I just check in which regions of the world your business is active.

Is your business active in READ OUT INTERVIEWER THE EEA COUNTRIES ARE: ICELAND, LIECHTENSTEIN, NORWAY, AUSTRIA, BELGIUM, BULGARIA, CYPRUS, CZECH REPUBLIC, DENMARK, ESTONIA, FINLAND, FRANCE, GERMANY, GREECE, HUNGARY, IRELAND, ITALY, LATVIA, LITHUANIA, LUXEMBOURG, MALTA, NETHERLANDS, POLAND, PORTUGAL, ROMANIA, SLOVAKIA, SLOVENIA, SPAIN, SWEDEN, UK.

Yes No DK Q40. (ASK IF Q17 = 2 - 7): Thinking now about the NUMBER of countries in which you are doing business overseas, has this number increased or decreased in the last 3 years? READ OUT

1. Increased
2. Decreased
3. Stayed the same
4. Don’t know

Q41. (ASK IF Q17 = 2 - 7): And over the next three years do you expect the number of countries you do business with overseas will increase, decrease or stay the same? READ OUT

1. Increased
2. Decreased
3. Stayed the same
4. Don’t know

Q42. I am going to read out a list of reasons which have been given for expanding the number of countries in which a business operates. I would like you to tell me the extent to which each applies to your business. Please give me a score between 1 and 5 for the extent to which you feel that this applies, where 1 means that it is ‘not at all beneficial and 5 means that this is ‘very beneficial’.

| Reason | Not at all beneficial | Neither | Very beneficial | NA | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|---------|-----------------|----| | Has enabled you to meet growth objectives? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | Allowed you to fully utilise your existing capacity? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | Reduced your dependence on a single or small number of markets? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | Enabling you to offset declining revenues in other markets | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | Enabling you to increase the commercial life span of any of your products or services? | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |

INTERVIEWER: READ OUT: I am now going to ask you about the extent to which you see there being opportunities for YOUR FIRM in some of the world’s fastest growing and emerging economies.

Q43. ASK ALL: For each of these countries please could you tell me whether you see it as being a good opportunity for your firm over the next 2 years, a possible opportunity, unlikely to provide you with an opportunity over this timeframe or are you already doing business there.

So firstly, would you say that < INSERT COUNTRY CODES 1- 10> is a…?

ROTATE ORDER OF 1-7, ALWAYS ASKING 8-10 LAST Q44. **ASK ALL EXCEPT ‘NOT YET TRADING’ (CODE 9 AT Q12 OR CODE 2 AT Q13):** In your opinion, has your business been negatively affected by the downturn in the US or UK markets over the last year? **SINGLE CODE.**

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q45. Again in your opinion, has your business been negatively affected by the downturn in the European Markets over the last year? **SINGLE CODE.**

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q46. **ASK IF YES (CODE 1) AT Q44 OR Q45. IF NO/DK AT BOTH Q44 AND Q45 GO TO Q47:** And has this prompted you to devote more attention to any of the emerging or fast growing economies I’ve just mentioned?

**INTERVIEWER: AS NECESSARY FOR EXAMPLE CHINA, INDIA, BRAZIL OR RUSSIA**

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q47. **IF ALREADY EXPORTING (IF Q3 =1-4)** And, in the last year, has your business benefited from sustained economic growth or increasing demand in any overseas countries? **SINGLE CODE.**

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q47a: Overall thinking about your overseas business do you see the economic downturn as offering your firm ……READ OUT

1. increased opportunities
2. about the same/no impact
3. reduced opportunities
4. don’t know

Q48. **MOVE QUESTION TO AFTER Q50**

**ASK ALL** I would now like to ask you some questions about the effect on your business on the recent decline in the value of sterling

Q Will your firm be able to take advantage of the decline in the value of sterling?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don't know

Q49. **ASK ALL IF ALREADY EXPORTING (IF Q3 =1-4):** So far have you increased/ (IF Q4=1) do you expect to increase your sales in any market as a result of the decline in the value of sterling?

1. Yes
2. No
3. DK

Q50. **(IF CODE 1 AT Q49): ASK ALL IF ALREADY EXPORTING (IF Q3 =1-4):** Has it been necessary/(IF Q4=1) Will it be necessary to discount your products or services in order to achieve this?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q48: **ASK ALL:** When operating in overseas markets do you price your products or services in **READ OUT**

1. Sterling
2. Overseas Currencies
3. Both
4. Don’t know
5. NA

Q51. **ASK ALL:** Taking account of imports, has the recent decline in the value of sterling raised the costs of conducting business overseas for your firm?

1. No
2. Not significantly
3. A little
4. Moderately
5. A lot
6. DK

Q52. **ASK ALL:** Overall what has the effect been of the decline in the value of sterling on your business?. Has it **READ OUT**

1. Been beneficial to your business
2. Had a negative affect your business
3. Had no effect
4. Other (specify)

Q53. **ASK ALL:** Still thinking about the current economic downturn, I would now like to ask you some questions about your company’s use of export credit insurance, letters of credit and access to finance.

**INTERVIEWER:** TRADE CREDIT INSURANCE POLICIES COVER AGAINST THE RISK OF NON PAYMENT, DUE TO YOUR CUSTOMERS' INSOLVENCY, AND PROTRACTED DEFAULT (I.E., NON-PAYMENT SIX MONTHS AFTER ORIGINAL PAYMENT DUE DATE). FOR EXPORTING COMPANIES, THEY CAN ALSO EXTEND OVER LOSSES ARISING AS A CONSEQUENCE OF POLITICAL (COUNTRY) RISK.

Can I just check, **(IF Q3 =1-4)** does your firm ever/ **(IF Q4 = 1)** will your firm use export credit insurance? **SINGLE CODE** INTERVIEWER NOTE: IF RESPONDENT DOES NOT KNOW WHAT EXPORT CREDIT INSURANCE IS THEN CODE AS ‘NO’

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q54. **(IF CODE 1 AT Q53 AND (IF Q3 =1-3 OR Q3 = 4 AND Q19 = 1))** ASK: And over the last 6 months, have you had any difficulties in accessing export credit insurance? **SINGLE CODE**

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know
4. Refused

Q55. **(IF Q3 =1-4):** Does your firm ever/ **(IF Q4 =1)** will your firm use letters of credit when doing business overseas? **SINGLE CODE**

INTERVIEWER: A LETTER OF CREDIT IS WHEN A CREDITOR/SELLER IS OFFERING AN OBLIGATION TO PAY THE AMOUNT STIPULATED IN THE CREDIT NOTWITHSTANDING ANY DEFENCE RELATING TO THE UNDERLYING CONTRACT OF SALE.

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q56. **(IF CODE 1 AT Q55) AND ALREADY EXPORTING (IF Q3 =1-4):** ASK: And over the last 6 months, have you had any difficulties in accessing letters of credit or with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit? **SINGLE CODE. IF YES PROBE WHETHER THIS RELATES TO ACCESSING LETTERS OF CREDIT, THE TERMS & CONDITIONS OR BOTH**

1. Yes – difficulty accessing the letters of credit
2. Yes – difficulty with the terms and conditions relating to these letters of credit
3. Yes – both
4. No
5. Don’t know
6. Refused

Q56aOver the past 6 months has your firm attempted to access finance either from within the company or from external sources?

1. Yes
2. No **GO TO Q61**
3. Don’t know **GO TO Q61**

Q57. **ASK ALL:** Over the last 6 months, has your business had any difficulties in accessing finance, either from within the company or from external sources? **SINGLE CODE**

1. Yes

2. No **GO TO Q61**

3. Don’t know **GO TO Q61**

4. Refused **GO TO Q61** Q58. **(IF CODE 1 AT Q57) ASK:** And did these difficulties relate to accessing internal finance from within the business or raising finance from external sources such as a bank? SINGLE CODE

5. Internal finance

6. External finance

7. Both

8. Don’t know **GO TO Q61**

9. Refused **GO TO Q61**

Q59. **(IF CURRENTLY EXPORTING IE CODE Q3 = 1-4) ASK:** Did any of these difficulties specifically relate to financing your overseas business activity?

1. Yes, related to overseas sales
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q60. **IF CURRENTLY EXPORTING IE CODE Q3 = 1-3 OR Q3 = 4 AND Q19 =1)**

If yes at Q59 say: Would you say that these difficulties accessing finance have had any negative impact on the value of your overseas sales over the last 6 months? SINGLE CODE

If No or Don’t know at Q59 say: “Although they did not specifically relate to financing your overseas business, would you say that these difficulties accessing finance have had any negative impact on the value of your overseas sales over the last 6 months? SINGLE CODE

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

**SECTION E – AWARENESS & NEEDS**

**ASK ALL:** I’d now like to ask you some questions about any sources of information or advice you are aware of that are available to help UK firms do business overseas.

Q61. Prior to this interview, had you heard of? **READ OUT – ROTATE STATEMENTS 4-8 (1-3 ALWAYS ASKED FIRST)**

Q62. **IF YES AT ANY OF Q61 1-8:** Have you used any of these?

| Q61 | Q61 | Q61 | Q62 | Q62 | |-----|-----|-----|-----|-----| | Yes | No | DK | Yes | No | | 1. UK Trade & Investment or UKTI | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | | 2. The commercial services provided by embassies overseas | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | | 3. The International Trade Advisors based in Business Links | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | | 4. Passport to Export | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | | 5. (IF YES AT CODES 1 OR 3) The Export Marketing Research Scheme or EMRS | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | | 6. (IF YES AT CODES 1 OR 3) Export Communication Reviews or ECR | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | | 7. The Tradeshows Access Programme or TAP | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | | 8. The Overseas Market Information Service or OMIS | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | Q63. **ASK ALL:** Prior to this interview, had you heard of Business Link?

**INTERVIEWER: READ OUT IF REQUIRED:** Business Link is a free business advice and support service, available online and through local advisers

1. Yes
2. No **GO TO Q65**
3. Don’t know **GO TO Q65**

Q64. Have you used Business Link?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q65. How likely will you be to use Business Link in the future?

1. Very likely
2. Quite likely
3. Quite unlikely
4. Very unlikely
5. Don’t know

______________________________________________________________________

**SECTION G – PROFILE**

I’d now like to ask you some questions about your business just to classify your answers for analysis purposes. You may of course skip any question you do not wish to answer.

Q66. **ASK ALL:** Can I just check, is the business UK or foreign-owned?

1. UK-owned
2. Foreign-owned
3. (Joint UK and foreign-owned)
4. Don’t know

Q67. **ASK ALL:** How many people are currently employed by your business in the UK?

**INTERVIEWER NOTE AS NECESSARY PLEASE INCLUDE BOTH FULL AND PART-TIME STAFF.**

1. Write in number (0+): **GO TO Q69**
2. Don’t know
3. Refused **GO TO Q69**

*(IF DON’T KNOW AT Q67)*

Q68. If you had to estimate, approximately how many people are employed by your business in the UK? **READ OUT AS NECESSARY**

01. No employees
02. 1-4
03. 5-9
04. 10-19
05. 20-49
06. 50-99
07. 100-199
08. 200-249
09. 250-499
10. 500 or more
11. Don’t know
12. Refused

Q69. **ASK ALL EXCEPT CODES 1, 2, 3 & 9 AT Q12 OR CODE 2 AT Q13:** Compared to this time three years ago, would you say that the number of people employed by your company is now…? **READ OUT**

1. Higher
2. Lower
3. Or, about the same as it was three years ago
4. Don’t know
5.

Q70. **IF HIGHER (CODE 1 AT Q69):** How many people were employed by your business three years ago? **READ OUT**

**INTERVIEWER NOTE AS NECESSARY PLEASE INCLUDE BOTH FULL AND PART-TIME STAFF.**

1. Write in number (0+): **GO TO Q72**
2. Don’t know
3. Refused **GO TO Q72**

Q71. **ASK IF DON’T KNOW/REFUSED AT Q70 OR (HIGHER (CODE 1 AT Q69) & NO FIGURE GIVEN IE Q68 OR Q67 (DON’T KNOW/REFUSED):** Over the last three years would you say that the number of people employed by your company has… **READ OUT**

1. Increased by more than 75%
2. Increased by between 30-75%
3. Or, increased by less than 30% compared to 3 years ago
4. Don’t know

Q72. **IF NOT ESTABLISHED IN THE LAST YEAR (Q12 NOT CODE 1 & NOT CODE 9 AND Q13 NOT CODE 2):** Can I ask, what is the current annual turnover of your business?

**IF ESTABLISHED IN LAST YEAR (CODES 1 OR 9 AT Q12 OR CODE 2 AT Q13):** What do you anticipate will be the turnover of your business in the first year of trading?

**AS NECESSARY BY THIS I MEAN YOUR ANNUAL SALES, INCOME OR RECEIPTS. AS NECESSARY PLEASE GIVE ME THE TURNOVER FOR THE UK PART OF YOUR BUSINESS, BUT INCLUDE OVERSEAS SALES MADE BY THE UK**

1. Write in amount in £ (£0+): **GO TO Q74**
2. Don’t know
3. Refused **GO TO Q74**

Q73. **IF DON’T KNOW AT Q72:** If you had to estimate your total turnover, into which of the following bands would you put yourself? **READ OUT AS NECESSARY**

01. £0

02. £100,000 or less

03. £100,001 - £500,000

04. £500,001 - £2million

05. £2million - £10million

06. £10million - £50million

07. More than £50million

08. Don’t know

09. Refused Q74. **ASK ALL EXCEPT CODES 1, 2, 3 & 9 AT Q12 OR CODE 2 AT Q13:** Compared to this time three years ago, would you say that your turnover is now …? **READ OUT**

10. Much higher

11. A bit higher

12. Lower

13. Or, about the same as it was three years ago

14. Don’t know

Q75. **ASK ALL UNLESS ESTABLISHED IN LAST TWO YEARS (I.E. NOT 1-2 OR 9 AT Q12 & NOT CODE 2 AT Q13):** Have you introduced any new products or services over the last three years?

1. Yes **GO TO Q77**
2. No **GO TO Q77**
3. Don’t know **GO TO Q77**

Q76. **ASK IF YES AT Q75:** And are these new products or services… **READ OUT - SINGLE CODE**

ADD AS NECESSARY: BY COMPLETELY NEW I MEAN THAT, TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN INTRODUCED BY ANYONE BEFORE YOU READ OUT – SINGLE CODE

1. Just new to your business
2. New to your industry or sector
3. Or, are they completely new to the world
4. (Some are just new to the business and some are completely new)
5. Don’t know

Q77. **ASK ALL EXCEPT NO EMPLOYEES (0 AT Q67 OR CODE 1 AT Q68) OR CODES 2, 3 OR 4 AT Q76:** Approximately how many of your UK employees are engaged either wholly or partly in R&D activity? **READ OUT AS NECESSARY**

01. Zero
02. One
03. 2-4
04. 5-9
05. 10-19
06. 20-49
07. 50-99
08. 100-199
09. 200-249
10. 250-499
11. 500 or more
12. Don’t know
13. refused

Q78. **ASK IF Q77 IS CODES 2-11:** Can I just check, are any of these employees involved in activities that could be described as ‘the development of scientific or technical knowledge that is not commonly available’?

01. Yes

02. No

03. Don’t know Q79. **ASK ALL EXCEPT NO EMPLOYEES (0 AT Q67 OR CODE 1 AT Q68) OR CODES 2, 3 OR 4 AT Q76 OR CODE 1 AT Q77:** And approximately how many of your employees are engaged either wholly or partly in new product or service development? **READ OUT AS NECESSARY**

04. Zero

05. One

06. 2-4

07. 5-9

08. 10-19

09. 20-49

10. 50-99

11. 100-199

12. 200-249

13. 250-499

14. 500 or more

15. Don’t know

16. Refused

Q80. **ASK ALL EXCEPT CODES 2, 3 OR 4 AT Q76 OR (CODE 1 AT Q78):** In the last year have you employed or commissioned anyone external to your business to conduct scientific or technical research, or any new product or service development activity for you?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q81. **ASK ALL:** Do you currently hold any patents or trademarks, either in the UK or overseas, for any of your products or services?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q82. Can I just check, do you have a current, written business plan?

1. Yes
2. No **GO TO 0**
3. Don’t know **GO TO 0**
4. Refused **GO TO 0**

Q83. Does the plan contain any targets relating to business in overseas markets?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know
4. Refused

Q84. **REMOVE QUESTION**

Q85. **ASK ALL EXCEPT ‘NOT YET TRADING’ (CODE 9 AT Q12 OR CODE 2 AT Q13):** Thinking about your business as a whole, what growth objectives do you have for the business over the next FIVE years? Do you plan to…? **READ OUT**

1. Remain the same size
2. Become smaller
3. Grow moderately
4. Grow substantially
5. Don’t know
6. Refused

Q86. REMOVE QUESTION

Q87. ASK ALL: That’s almost the end of the interview, thank you very much for taking part. Would you be willing to take part in any future UK Trade & Investment research?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q88. We will be producing a summary report of the results from this survey. Would you like us to send you an electronic link to this summary report? READ OUT ADD AS NECESSARY THE REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE LATE 2009.

1. Yes
2. No
3. Don’t know

Q89. IF YES AT Q88: Can I take your e-mail address? REASSURE RESPONDENT THAT THIS WILL NOT BE PASSED ON & ONLY USED TO MAIL A LINK TO THE REPORT

Q90. IF YES AT Q88 BUT RESPONDENT DOESN’T HAVE AN EMAIL ADDRESS: Can I confirm your postal address then and we will send you a letter containing the internet address for the electronic report? REASSURE RESPONDENT THAT THIS WILL NOT BE PASSED ON & ONLY USED TO MAIL A LINK TO THE REPORT

Q91. ASK ALL: Finally as proof of this interview please could I just confirm your business postcode?

Q 91a And can I just confirm whether you are located in England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. INTERVIEWER: If England, which Government Office Region?

England • North East North West Yorkshire and The Humber East Midlands West Midlands East of England London South East South West

Scotland Wales Northern Ireland

Q92. And may I take a note of your name?

WRITE IN………………………………………………

Q93. UKTI would like Accent to recontact a cross section of businesses interviewed in this survey at a later date to undertake further research to investigate some specific issues in greater detail. Would you be willing for us to recontact you at a later date to conduct another interview?

1. Yes COLLECT DETAILS
2. No

Thank you for your help in this research

This research was conducted under the terms of the MRS code of conduct and is completely confidential. If you would like to confirm my credentials or those of Accent please call the MRS free on 0500 396999.

Please can I take a note of your name and where we can contact you for quality control purposes?

Respondent name: .............................................................................................................

Telephone: home:.............................................. work:...............................................

Thank you

I confirm that this interview was conducted under the terms of the MRS code of conduct and is completely confidential